Agenda of Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting Agenda

2 June 2021

The Local Government Act 2002 states the role of a Community Board is to:

(a) Represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community.

(b) Consider and report on all matters referred to it by the territorial authority, or any matter of interest or concern to the community board.

(d) Prepare an annual submission to the territorial authority for expenditure within the community.

(e) Communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community.

(f) Undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the territorial authority

Council Delegations to Community Boards - January 2013

The "civic amenities" referred to in these delegations include the following Council activities:

· Amenity lighting

· Cemeteries

· Drainage (does not include reticulated storm water systems)

· Footpaths/cycle ways and walkways.

· Public toilets

· Reserves

· Halls

· Swimming pools

· Town litter

· Town beautification and maintenance

· Street furniture including public information signage.

· Street/public Art.

· Trees on Council land

· Off road public car parks.

· Lindvart Park – a Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board civic amenity.

Exclusions: From time to time Council may consider some activities and assets as having district wide significance and these will remain the responsibility of Council. These currently include: The roading network, Hundertwasser toilets, District Library Network, Baysport, the Kerikeri, Kaikohe & Kaitaia Airports, Hokianga Vehicle Ferry, i-Site network, Far North Community Centre, Kerikeri Domain, Kawakawa Heated Swimming Pool, Kaikohe Cemetery, Kerikeri Sports Complex, The Centre at Kerikeri, the Bay of Islands/Hokianga Cycle Trail.

Set local priorities for minor capital works in accordance with existing strategies,

1. Recommend local service levels and asset development priorities for civic amenities as part of the Annual Plan and Long-Term Plan processes.

2. Reallocate capital budgets within the Annual Plan of up to 5% for any specific civic amenity, provided that the overall activity budgetary targets are met.

3. Make grants from the allocated Community Funds in accordance with policy 3209, and the SPARC/Sport Northland Rural Travel fund in accordance with the criteria set by the respective body, and, for the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board, the power to allocate the Hundertwasser Donations Account.

4. Provide comment to council staff on resource consent applications having significance within the Community, including the provision of land for reserves or other public purposes.

5. To hold, or participate in hearings, as the Council considers appropriate, in relation to submissions pertinent to their community made to plans and strategies including the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan, and if appropriate recommend decisions to the Council.

6. To hold hearings of submissions received as a result of Special Consultative Procedures carried out in respect of any matter other than an Annual or Long-Term Plan and make recommendations to the Council.

7. Where recommended by staff to appoint management committees for local reserves, cemeteries, halls, and community centres.

8. To allocate names for previously unnamed local roads, reserves and other community facilities, and recommend to Council name changes of previously named roads, reserves, and community facilities subject to consultation with the community.

9. To consider the provisions of new and reviewed reserve management plans for recommendation to the Council in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and hear or participate in the hearing of submissions thereto, as considered appropriate by the Council.

10. To provide recommendations to the Council in respect of applications for the use and/or lease of reserves not contemplated by an existing reserve management plan.

11. Prohibit the use of skateboards in specified locations within their communities, in accordance with Council’s Skating Bylaw 1998.

12. Recommend new bylaws or amendments to existing bylaws.

13. Prepare and review management plans for local cemeteries within budget parameters and in a manner consistent with Council Policy.

14. Exercise the following powers in respect of the Council bylaws within their community:

a. Control of Use of Public Spaces – Dispensations on signs

b. Mobile Shops and Hawkers – Recommend places where mobile shops and/or hawkers should not be permitted.

c. Parking and Traffic Control – Recommend parking restrictions, and areas where complying camping vehicles may park, and consider and grant dispensations in accordance with clause 2007.2

d. Public Places Liquor Control – Recommend times and places where the possession or drinking of alcohol should be prohibited.

e. Speed Limits – Recommend places and speed limits which should be imposed.

15. To appoint Community Board members to speak on behalf of their community in respect of submissions or petitions.

16. Specific to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board – consider any recommendations of the Paihia Heritage Working Group and make appropriate recommendations to Council on the development of a draft Plan Change and a Section 32 analysis on heritage provisions for Paihia.

17. To set schedule of meeting dates, times and venues, subject to the meetings not conflicting with meetings of the Council and satisfying the provisions of the Local Government Official information and Meetings Act 1987.

18. To review all proposed public art projects on a project-by project basis to ensure they comply with policy #5105 Art in Public Places, including approval of the aesthetic appearance, maintenance programme, insurance and appropriate location, and to agree to their installation.

19. In respect of applications from food establishments for permission to establish tables and chairs on a public place, i.e. Alfresco dining in accordance with Policy 3116, to consider and decide on any application which does not meet all criteria of the policy, and any application which staff recommend to be declined.

20. Subject to a report from the appropriate managers and the appropriate budgetary provision, to make decisions in respect of civic amenities including the levels of service, and the provision or removal of an amenity not provided for elsewhere in these delegations.

Terms of Reference

In fulfilling its role and giving effect to its delegations, Community Boards are expected to:

1. Comment on adverse performance to the Chief Executive in respect of service delivery.

2. Assist their communities in the development of structure plans, emergency management community response plans, and community development plans.

3. Assist their communities to set priorities for Pride of Place programmes.

4. Have special regard for the views of Maori.

5. Have special regard for the views of special interest groups, e.g. disabled, youth, aged, etc.

6. Actively participate in community consultation and advocacy and keep Council informed on local issues.

7. Seek and report to Council community feedback on current issues by:

a. Holding a Community forum prior to Board meetings

b. Varying the venues of Board meetings to enable access by members of the community

8. Monitor and make recommendations to Council to improve effectiveness of policy.

9. Appoint a member to receive Annual Plan\Long Term Council Community Plan submissions pertinent to the Board area, attend hearings within the Board area, and attend Council deliberations prior to the Plan adoption.

Protocols

In supporting Community Boards to fulfil their role, the Council will:

1. Provide appropriate management support for the Boards.

2. Organise and host regular workshops with the Community Boards l to assess the 'State of the Wards & District' to establish spending priorities.

3. Prior to decision-making, seek and include 'Community Board views' in Council reports in relation to:

a. the disposal and purchase of land

b. proposals to acquire or dispose of reserves

c. representation reviews

d. development of new maritime facilities

e. community development plans and structure plans

f. removal and protection of trees

g. local economic development initiatives

h. changes to the Resource Management Plan

4. Organise and host quarterly meetings between Boards, the CEO and senior management staff.

5. Prepare an induction/familiarisation process targeting new members in particular early in the term.

6. Support Board members to arrange meetings with local agencies and service clubs to place more emphasis on partnerships and raising profile of the Boards as community leaders.

7. Permit Board chairperson (or nominated member) speaking rights at Council meetings.

8. Help Boards to implement local community projects.

9. Arrange for Infrastructure and Asset Management Staff to meet with the Community Boards in September each year to agree the capital works for the forthcoming year for input into the Annual or Long-Term Plan.

10. Provide information.

KAIKOHE-HOKIANGA COMMUNITY BOARD MEMBERS REGISTER OF INTERESTS

Name	Responsibility (i.e. Chairperson etc)	Declaration of Interests	Nature of Potential Interest	Member's Proposed Management Plan
Mike Edmonds	Chair	Kaikohe Mechanical and Historic Trust	Council Funding	Decide at the time
Mike Edmonds	Committee member	Kaikohe Rugby Football and Sports Club	Council Funding	Withdraw and abstain
Kelly van Gaalen	No form received
Louis Toorenburg	No form received
Alan Hessell	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil
Laurie Byers	Kaikohe Golf Club
	Kaikohukohu Trust
	North Point Trust
	Patron Bay of Islands Hockey
Emma Davis	Secretary	Pompallier Hokianga Trust	Council Funding	Decide at the time to withdraw and/or abstain
	Trustee	Raiatea Resource Centre	Council Funding	Decide at the time to withdraw and/or abstain
	Committee Member	Rawene Hall	Council Funding	Decide at the time to withdraw and/or abstain
	Committee Member	Kohukohu Hall	Council Funding	Decide at the time to withdraw and/or abstain
	Member of teaching staff	Broadwood Area School	Council Funding	Decide at the time to withdraw and/or abstain
John Vujcich	Board Member	Pioneer Village	Matters relating to funding and assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Waitukupata Forest Ltd	Potential for council activity to directly affect its assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Rural Service Solutions Ltd	Matters where council regulatory function impact of company services	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Kaikohe (Rau Marama) Community Trust	Potential funder	Declare interest and abstain
	Partner	MJ & EMJ Vujcich	Matters where council regulatory function impacts on partnership owned assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	Kaikohe Rotary Club	Potential funder, or impact on Rotary projects	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	New Zealand Institute of Directors	Potential provider of training to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
	Member	Institute of IT Professionals	Unlikely, but possible provider of services to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
Moko Tepania	Teacher	Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Kaikohe.	Potential Council funding that will benefit my place of employment.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Chairperson	Te Reo o Te Tai Tokerau Trust.	Potential Council funding for events that this trust runs.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga o Te Rarawa	As a descendent of Te Rarawa I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rarawa Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa	As a descendent of Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Kahukuraariki Trust Board	As a descendent of Kahukuraariki Trust Board I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Kahukuraariki Trust Board Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi	As a descendent of Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting Agenda

2 June 2021

MINUTES OF
Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, Memorial Avenue, Kaikohe
ON Wednesday, 12 May 2021 AT 10.30 am

PRESENT: Chairperson Mike Edmonds, Member Emma Davis, Member Louis Toorenburg, Member Kelly van Gaalen, Member Alan Hessell, Member Laurie Byers, Member John Vujcich.

IN ATTENDANCE:

STAFF PRESENT: Marlema Baker (Meetings Advisor), Kathryn Trewin (Funding Advisor)

1 NGā WHAKAPāHA ME NGā PāNGA MEMA / Apologies and conflicts of Interest

1a Apologies and Conflicts of Interest

Resolution 2021/33

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That:

a) the apology from member Moko Tepania be accepted and a leave of absence granted.

b) the apology from member Emma Davis for lateness be accepted.

Carried

2 Public Forum

· Shaun Reilly opposes the implementation of Maori Wards and hopes Council reconsiders their decision.

3 Ngā Tono KŌrero / Deputations

· Phil Grimshaw spoke regarding Healthy Families (document tabled).

· John Klaricich (on behalf of Ian Mackenzie) spoke regarding Pakanae Urupa (document tabled).

· Liz Owen spoke regarding Okaihau Playcentre.

4 Speakers

· Ana Heremaia – Ākau Design: funding applications 7.4a and 7.4b refers.

§ 7.4b – Te Reo Maori signage in Kaikohe Streetscape and waiata Maori to be recorded.

§ 7.4a – Bling Bling event - needs a big structure to house mahi over 4 days.

· Tania Filia – Omanaia Marae 7.4d refers – Omanaia Marae.

· Seeks funding for bi-fold fold out tables.

· Cheryl Smith – Rural Travel Fund speaking on behalf of Sport Northland:

· Kathryn Trewin to provide a report to the August 2020 Community Board meeting regarding making an application to Sport Northland to increase funding for the Kaikohe-Hokianga ward.

· Chair Edmonds raised the possibility of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board augmenting some of the Rural Travel funding needed to supplement the needs of the Kaikohe-Hokianga ward.

Meeting adjourned 11:55 am – 12:49 pm

5 Notice of Motion

5.1 Kaikohe-Hokianga Notice of Motion - Okaihau Playcentre Reserve

Agenda item 6.1 document number A3181638, pages 12 - 12 refers

Resolution 2021/34

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That, pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Cl 32(6), the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board requests that the Council consider delegating governance responsibility for the reserve land upon which the Okaihau Playcentre sits to the KHCB to the fullest extent possible, and that the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board be delegated recommendation rights for all those powers not able to be delegated.

Carried

6 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

6.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Agenda item 7.1 document number A3052579, pages 13 - 13 refers

Resolution 2021/35

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board confirms the minutes of their meeting held 7 April 2021 as a true and correct record.

Carried

7 Reports

7.1 Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Hokianga Spraying Commiittee

Agenda item 8.1 document number A3181642, pages 18 - 20 refers

Resolution 2021/36

Moved: Member Louis Toorenburg

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board adopt the terms of reference for the Hokianga Spraying Committee as follows: that with regard to the herbicide and spraying in and around Rawene the Hokianga Spraying Committee will:

a) represent, and act as an advocate for, the interests of its community.

b) consider and report on information provided and/or referred to it by the Far North District Council.

c) prepare an annual submission to the Far North District Council for expenditure within the community; and

d) communicate with interested parties within the community.

Carried

7.2 Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Community Board Fund Account as at 31 March 2021

Agenda item 8.2 document number A3160464, pages 23 - 24 refers

Resolution 2021/37

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Emma Davis

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board

a) receives the report Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Community Board Fund Account as at 31 March 2021, and

b) request that any unallocated funds from 2021 be rolled over into the next financial year.

Carried

7.3 Winter 2021 Rural Travel Funding Applications

Agenda item 8.3 document number A3155766, pages 27 - 30 refers

Resolution 2021/38

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Louis Toorenburg

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board allocates Rural Travel Grant funding in accordance with the recommendations received from Sport Northland as follows:

a) Datz Us Netball $2400

b) Hokianga Sports Club $2000

c) Kaikohe Rugby Football and Sports Club $3800

d) Kerikeri Gymnastics Club $910

e) Mid North United Sports $2300

f) Omanaia School $800

g) Taiamai Ohaeawai Junior Rugby Club $2000

h) Te Kura a-Iwi o Pawarenga $350

i) Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Kaikohe $3042

j) Te Kura Taumata o Panguru $1000

k) Rawene Primary School $2000

Total $20,602

Carried

7.4 FUNDING APPLICATIONS

Agenda item 8.4 document number A3169182, pages 86 - 91 refers

Resolution 2021/39

Moved: Member Louis Toorenburg

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

7.4.a That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $xxx (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Ākau Foundation for costs towards Bling Bling Toi Marama 2021 to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4.b That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $xxx (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Ākau Foundation for costs towards Te Reo Māori on the Streets to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4.c That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $xxx (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Hokianga Treks 4 Kids for costs towards clearing the Rawene horse track to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4.d That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $xxx (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Omanaia Marae for costs towards tables and chairs for the whare kai to support the following Community Outcomes:

i. Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii. Proud, vibrant communities

Carried

7.4.e RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution 2021/40

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Laurie Byers

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution

7.4 – Funding Applications

s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.

s7(2)(f)(i) - free and frank expression of opinions by or between or to members or officers or employees of any local authority.

s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7.

Carried

7.4.f Motion to move out of closed meeting into open meeting

Resolution 2021/41

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board moves out of closed meeting into open meeting.

Carried

7.4 Funding Applications continued

Agenda item 8.4 document number A3169182, pages 86 - 91 refers

Resolution 2021/42

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

7.4a That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $7500 (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Ākau Foundation for costs towards Bling Bling Toi Marama 2021 and $7500 on presentation of an invoice for 2022 to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4b That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $10,000 (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Ākau Foundation for costs towards Te Reo Māori on the Streets to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4c That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $1,500 (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Hokianga Treks 4 Kids for costs towards clearing the Rawene horse track to support the following Community Outcomes:

i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

ii) Proud, vibrant communities

7.4d That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board approves the sum of $2,450 (plus GST if applicable) be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Omanaia Marae for costs towards tables and chairs for the whare kai to support the following Community Outcomes:

iii. Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable

iv. Proud, vibrant communities

Carried

7.5 Project Funding Reports

Agenda item 8.5 document number A3169225, pages 120 - 121 refers

Resolution 2021/43

Moved: Member Louis Toorenburg

Seconded: Member Laurie Byers

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board note the project reports received from:

a) Hokianga Trek 4 Kids

b) Okaihau Bowling Club – Kitchen

c) Okaihau Bowling Club – Bowling Mats

d) He Whakamanamai Whanau Trust

Carried

7.6 Rural Travel Funding Reports

Agenda item 8.6 document number A3170785, pages 134 - 135 refers

Resolution 2021/44

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board note the project reports received from:

a) Hokianga Sports Club

b) Rawene Primary School

Carried

8 Information Reports

8.1 Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Financial Performance Activities by Ward for the period ending 31 March 2021

Agenda item 9.1 document number A3160432, pages 142 - 142 refers

Resolution 2021/45

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Laurie Byers

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board receives the report Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Financial Performance Activities by Ward for the period ending 31 March 2021.

Carried

9 tE kAPINGA hUI / Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 2pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting held on 2 June 2021.

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting Agenda

2 June 2021

6 Reports

6.1 Proposal to Construct an Erosion Protection Structure on Council Owned Reserve, Omapere

File Number: A3183735

Author: Ruben Wylie, Principle Planner Infrastructure

Authoriser: Andy Finch, General Manager - Infrastructure and Asset Management

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek a decision from Council, via the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, for a request to construct an erosion protection structure partially on Council owned local purpose reserve within the coastal environment of Omapere.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

The owners of properties at 264 and 266 State Highway 12, Omapere propose to construct an erosion protection structure adjacent to the shoreline fronting their properties. The dwelling at these properties are at risk of being affected by shoreline retreat. Council owned local purpose reserve land is situated between the subject properties and toe of the dune scarp on which the erosion protection structure is proposed to be built. A portion of the proposed structure will be located within the boundary of this reserve land. In keeping with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, and Council’s Reserves Policy, approval of the proposal to occupy part of local purpose reserve with an erosion protection structure sits with Council. Staff recommendation is to approve the request.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board recommend to Council that it:

a) Approves the construction of, and associated occupation with, an erosion protection structure on Far North District Council owned local purpose reserved legally described as Lot 5 DP196729; and

b) The approval is provided subject to a memorandum of encumbrance being recorded on the titles of Lot 1 DP196729 and Lot 1 DP310507 and that the encumbrance records the agreement that the owners of those properties:

I. bear full responsibility for the maintenance, repair, removal of the seawall (if required) during its lifetime, and end of its lifetime.

II. incur cost of the agreement construction and registration against title.

III. notify FNDC of any variation or modification of the erosion protection structure

To avoid doubt, approval is given both within Council’s capacity as the administering body of the reserve and an affected person within the meaning of Section 95 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The owners of properties at 264 and 266 State Highway have lodged resource consent applications with the Far North District Council and the Northland Regional Council to allow for the construction of an erosion protection structure, and ongoing occupation of space with the structure in the marine and coastal area. The proposal is to construct the erosion protection structure on the seaward side of FNDC owned reserve land. A portion of the structure will need to be located within the reserve land. FNDC has accordingly been treated as an affected party within the meaning of s95 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The applicants have sought written approval from FNDC in its capacity as the owner of the reserve land. Given the proposal is to occupy a portion of FNDC reserve land, the consideration of written approval must also address the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977.

Council’s Reserve Policy sets out that decisions to allow occupation of reserves requires a decision by Council. In keeping with Council policy, the matter is first being brought to the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board for a subsequent recommendation to Council.

1.1) Application Details

The proposal is to construct an erosion protection structure at the toe of a tall (5m high) sandy dune scarp at Omapere. The purpose of the work is to protect the properties at 264 and 266 State Highway 12. These two properties are located on the seaward side of state highway 12, opposite Opononi Area School. The approximate location of the subject site is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Location of the proposed erosion protection work (red outline).

Cliff retreat driven by erosion of the dune toe is threatening the properties. Both dwellings on each property are in close proximity to the scarp. The property at No 266 being closest, with approximately 2-3m between parts of the dwelling and the headscarp of the dune.

The seawall is to comprise of an engineered riprap structure, extending approximately 142m along the base of the dune scarp. Details of the structure are included in the assessment of environmental effects prepared for the resource consent application. That assessment is attached as Attachment 1.

1.2) Affected reserve land

Two parcels of Esplanade Reserve land are located seaward of the subject properties, legally described as Lot 5 DP196729 and Lot 2 DP91297 and are both Local Purpose reserves within the meaning of the Reserves Act 1977. The location of the proposed seawall in relation to the reserve land is depicted in Figure 2 below. The seaward most reserve parcel has largely eroded and now forms part of the active beach front dune face. The proposed seawall is intended to be built along the seaward boundary of the second reserve parcel (Lot 5 DP196729) for a distance of approximately 50m before angling towards the southeast crossing into the boundary of the second reserve (Lot 2 DP91297). This alignment generally follows the natural line of the dune toe.

The proposed structure is intended to terminate on the seaward side of the reserve opposite 262 State Highway 12 to the north and 268 and 270 State Highway 12 to the south. These properties are privately owned.

Figure 2. Reserve land affected by the proposed sea wall structure. Approximate seawall extent and location shown in red.

· It should be noted at this point that where reserve land owned by a local authority is subject to erosion, any portion of the reserve that is located seaward of the line of mean high water springs is divested from the local authority in accordance with Section 11 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011. Email correspondence from FNDC’s Property Legalisation team to the applicant dated 5 August 2020 (included as Appendix E of the application report) confirms the status of the reserve land, stating:

· Lot 2 DP 91297 (the seaward most parcel) is completely under water and is now part of the Common Marine and Coastal Area.

· Lot 5 DP 196729 is partially under water and that portion is lost to the Common Marine and Coastal Area and the title is divested for that portion of land now below MHWS.

· With the above taken into account, any portion of the reserve parcels situated seaward of the dune toe are no longer owned by Council and it is therefore only relevant to consider the effects of the proposed activity on the portion of reserve located landward of the toe of the dune cliff.

1.3) Coastal setting

a) The coastline in the vicinity of subject site includes number of existing seawalls. Most recently Waka Kotahi completed approximately 2km of erosion protection at various sections of the coastline to the north of the subject sites through to Opononi. In addition, various privately owned erosion protection structures are located to the immediate south and north of the subject site. The approximate location and extent of these structures is depicted in Figure 3 below.

Finally, it should be noted that a 115m long rock revetment structure, similar to that which is the subject of this report, is proposed to be constructed to protect Freese park from shoreline retreat. This is subject to Council ratification and community consultation. The delivery timeframe for that project is May 2022.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

2.1) Matters relevant to the decision

Coastal processes

The resource consent application lodged with both FNDC and NRC includes a comprehensive assessment of the coastal environment, and detailed assessment of effects of the proposed activity on coastal processes, including potential impacts on adjoining properties. A summary of technical matters relevant to the determination requested by this report is provided in Attachment 2. Full details of the technical assessment can be found in the application report attached as Attachment 1.

The technical assessment included with the resource consent application has been prepared by a suitably qualified engineer experienced in coastal engineering. The assessment demonstrates that the design of the proposed structure is unlikely to result in any significant adverse effects on coastal process. In particular, the assessment demonstrates that erosion on either end of the structure is not anticipated and that the structure has been designed to accommodate future sea level rise scenarios in accordance with relevant Ministry for the Environment guidelines.

Coastal erosion hazard

Northland Regional Council has analysed and mapped coastal erosion hazards around Northland to better understand impacts into the future. The most up to date predicted future shoreline positions were released in 2021^{^[1]}. These are shown in Figure 4 below in relation to the subject properties.

Coastal Erosion Hazard Zones contained in Figure 3 (CEHZ’s) are defined as follows:

· CEHZ1 – Predicted future shoreline at 2080 with a 66% probability of being exceeded.

· CEHZ2 – Predicted future shoreline at 2115 with a 5% probability of being exceeded.

The erosion hazard mapping indicates that both properties are likely to become significantly threatened within the next 50 years.

Resource consent requirements

The proposed erosion protection structure requires resource consents from the Northland Regional Council. Earthworks associated with the enabling works is also required by the Far North District Council and the Northland Regional Council. Importantly, advice from the Northland Regional Council is that, once the erosion protection structure has been constructed, the resource consents for the structure will no longer be required because consent is only required for construction, not ongoing occupation, and use. That no consent is required for the ongoing use of the seawall means that the owners of the asset will not be bound by any consent requirements, including requirements for on-going maintenance, addressing any adverse effects that may arise or removing the structure.

Access

Access to the affected portion of the reserve will be unaffected by the proposed erosion protection structure. The width of the reserve is approximately 10m from the toe of the dune scarps to the landward most boundary of the reserve. The proposed structure is to be located at the toe of the dune scarp and so access to the reserve will be unchanged from the current situation. Access to the beach from the reserve is presently not possible as a result of the c.5m high dune scarp (Figures 5 and 6).

Figure 3. Dune scarp seaward of No 266 SH12

Reserves Act 1977 requirements

Council is the administering body for the reserve. Section 40 of the Reserves Act 1977 charges the administering body with managing and controlling reserves so as to ensure the use, enjoyment, development, maintenance, protection, and preservation, as the case may require, for the purpose for which it is classified.

The reserve is designated Local Purpose Reserve (Esplanade) Reserve Under the Reserves Act 1977. The purpose of esplanade reserve is further defined in the Resource Management Act 1991 as being:

· An esplanade reserve or an esplanade strip has 1 or more of the following purposes:

(a) to contribute to the protection of conservation values by, in particular, —

(i) maintaining or enhancing the natural functioning of the adjacent sea, river, or lake; or

(ii) maintaining or enhancing water quality; or

(iii) maintaining or enhancing aquatic habitats; or

(iv) protecting the natural values associated with the esplanade reserve or esplanade strip; or

(v) mitigating natural hazards; or

(b) to enable public access to or along any sea, river, or lake; or

(c) to enable public recreational use of the esplanade reserve or esplanade strip and adjacent sea, river, or lake, where the use is compatible with conservation values.

Taking the above into account, it is considered that granting permission to allow for the construction of an erosion protection structure is generally in keeping with the purposes of esplanade reserves set out in the RMA, and the broad responsibilities of administering bodies set out in Section 40 of the Reserves Act 1977.

Relevant FNDC Policy

FNDC Reserves Policy

FNDC has a reserves policy dated March 2017. Section 4 of the Reserves Policy contains policies covering encroachments on Council owned land. Policy 2 sets out that Council will decline all future requests for private use of public land for access or occupation unless such use provides a benefit to the proper use and enjoyment of the public land. It is worth noting that the current reserve policy contains no policy direction or objectives that consider climate change, sea level rise or coastal erosion and so the policy direction it contains does not offer any substantive guidance in respect of the situation that is the subject of this report; and it is unclear whether Policy 2 was drafted with the proposal that is the subject of this report in mind.

As discussed in the previous section it is considered that granting approval of the proposal is generally in keeping with the purposes of esplanade reserves set out in the RMA, and the broad responsibilities of administering bodies set out in Section 40 of the Reserves Act 1977 because it will enable the preservation and maintenance of the of the reserve. Given the proposed seawall will have the effect of preserving the reserve through protection from progressive shoreline retreat, it is considered that the seawall is not inconsistent with Policy 2.

Draft Proposed Far North District Plan

It is relevant to note that the policy direction in the Draft Proposed Far North District Plan seeks to discourage new development within the CEHZ1 (50-year erosion hazard line), with most new development within that zone requiring a discretionary resource consent. Although the plan remains in draft and has not yet been notified, the policy direction provides indication to Far North communities that development within the 50-year hazard zone is an activity that is not encouraged from a land use planning context.

Council’s liability for an erosion protection structure on ‘Local Purpose Reserve’

As set out earlier in this report, once the consent for the erosion protection structure has been exercised, the consent holder will be able to surrender the resource consents and will not be bound by any consenting requirements covering the on-going maintenance, removal or addressing potential adverse effects associated with changes in coastal processes. The lack of on-going resource consent could expose council to the liability of addressing these issues given it will be located on council land.

Should the Council decide to grant approval for the construction of the erosion protection structure on the reserve, it is recommended that a memorandum of encumbrance is registered against the record of titles of each of the applicants to formalise the existence of the seawall. The encumbrance can require agreement to the following conditions:

· Applicants’ responsible for the maintenance, repair, removal of the seawall (if required) during its lifetime, and end of its lifetime

· Applicants’ to incur cost of the agreement construction and registration against title

· Applicant to notify FNDC of any variation or modification of the seawall

It is considered that the above conditions will adequately address any issues council being potentially liable for the seawall and any associated effects on adjoining properties.

2.2) Consideration of Alternatives

The assessment of environmental effects for the resource consent application includes an assessment of alternatives options. These alternatives are summarised below.

Do Nothing – Allow Retreat of the Coastline

The Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report identifies that the shoreline is progressively retreating and allowing the coastline to continue to retreat would likely require the dwellings within each property to be relocated to the CEHZ2 (2115) hazard line. The AEE report sets out that this option is not considered to be practicable owing to the progressive nature of the shoreline retreat and the fact that the owners would be faced with the same issue in later years. This option was accordingly ruled out.

‘Soft’ Protection Options

The AEE report includes an assessment of soft protection options which include importing stand, planting, and installation of groynes to assist with the retention of imported stand. To be effective, the groyne structures would substantially impede access along the beach and would potentially disrupt longshore sediment transport – potentially causing unacceptable erosion at adjoining sites. Importing sand was identified as not being practicable because the material would need to be located seaward of the natural coastline position of the rest of the embayment and so would be subject to potentially rapid erosion and transport to the wider beach system – meaning that sand would need to continuously imported in order for it to provide an effective means of erosion protection.

2.3) Options Assessment

Option 1: Withhold written approval

It is unlikely the application would be able to proceed in its current form without FNDC giving approval to occupy the reserve with the seawall. Approval is required for the resource consent applications to proceed without notification. However, the seawall cannot proceed without approval from the administering body of the reserve because doing so would be inconsistent with the legal requirements of the Reserves Act 1977.

In effect, this option would severely limit the ability for the owners of the two properties fronting the FNDC reserve land to protect their properties and dwellings from ongoing erosion of the coastal cliff. Ultimately, this option will require that the landowners relocate the dwellings given the current level of risk they are exposed to.

Option 2 (recommended option): Provide written approval

This option will allow the two properties to construct a seawall at the toe of the remaining reserve land. This option will provide protection of coastal erosion for at least a 50-year term with negligible impact on the use of the existing reserve land. It is considered any liability that council would be exposed to by virtue of it being the landowner on which the structure is partially located can be suitably limited by way of a memorandum of encumbrance placed on the titles of applicants’ properties.

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

b) Option 2 is the recommended option for the following reasons:

· There is minimal council reserve remaining and that which does remain has limited value as a local purpose reserve.

· The proposed structure will not affect access to or from the reserve above those affects caused by the 5m high dune cliff.

· The application documentation provides a detailed assessment of the proposal’s effect on coastal processes and demonstrates with sufficient levels of certainty that the proposal is unlikely to exacerbate coastal erosion processes and has been designed to accommodate sea level rise.

· The option will allow two properties to protect existing dwellings that are at high risk of being affected by coastal erosion in the near future and will allow other options to be implemented (e.g. managed retreat) as the effects of sea level rise become more acute.

3) PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

All legal costs associated with the drafting interpretation of the memorandum of encumbrance are to be borne by the owners of the properties that have sought to construct the erosion protection structure on Council owned reserve land. Given the encumbrance will place the responsibility of the maintenance and eventual removal of the seawall on the owners of the properties described as Lot 1 DP196729 and Lot 1 DP310507, it is not expected the recommended resolution will carry any ongoing financial implications

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Proposed Omapere Seawall Assessment of Environmental Effects - A3184151 ⇩

2. Proposed Omapere Seawall - Summary of relevant techincal matters - A3184158 ⇩

Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / Compliance Schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance Requirement	Aromatawai Kaimahi / Staff Assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	It is not considered that the recommended resolution tiggers the thresholds in any of the criteria set out in the current significance and engagement policy.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The relevant legislation is the Reserves Act 1977. The relevant policy is Councils Reserves Policy, dated 16 March 2017. The implications of the recommended resolution in respect of the provisions of the Reserves Act and the Reserves Policy are discussed in the body of the report.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The proposal that is the subject of this report does not affect the district as a whole. Whilst the topic of climate change and its impact on coastal erosion is of relevant to the district, that is not a topic that is appropriate to broach as part of this report.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	The views of mana whenua have not been sought. The applicant has consulted with mana whenua as part of the consent application and the outcome of that consultation is reported in is the AEE report attached as Attachment 1.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities).	Taking into account the conclusions of the technical assessment contained with the AEE report (Attachment 1), it is considered that no persons are likely to be affected by the proposal.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Refer to Section 3 of this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting Agenda

2 June 2021

6.2 Kaikohe-Hokianga Footpath Programme

File Number: A3201345

Author: Sandi Morris, Road Safety and Traffic Planning Engineer

Authoriser: Andy Finch, General Manager - Infrastructure and Asset Management

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek approval for the 2021/2022-year footpath programme for the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· There is a total of $150,000 available for New Footpath in the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward.

· An additional $320,000 has been proposed to Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) for new footpath projects from the 2021/2022 financial year at the revised Financial Assistance Rate of 69%.

· Waka Kotahi requires footpaths to have a strong emphasis on safety and accessibility so new measures have been introduced into the ‘footpath matrix’.

· Due to recent impacts on Central Government budgets, the previous funding allocations from the ‘Low Cost Low Risk Activity Class, is unlikely to be accepted for the 2021/2022 financial year. The outcome of this funding allocation may not be known until September 2021.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward.:

a) Agree to the 2021/2022 footpath programme to include the following ‘top nine’ prioritised and subject to funding availability:

i) Parnell Street Rawene - Hospital to Clendon Esplanade (Est $500,000)

ii) Manning Street Rawene - Existing to House #54 Manning Street (Est $70,000)

iii) Koutu Point Road Koutu - SH12 to 68 Koutu Point Road (Est $340,000)

iv) Old Wharf Road Omapere - SH12 to Wharf (Est $40,000)

v) Freese Park Road Omapere – Old Wharf Road to end (Est $40,000)

vi) Horeke Road Okaihau - Existing to house 2054 (Est $230,000)

vii) Honey Street – Parnell Street to End (Est $120,000)

viii) Taumataiwi Street Opononi – Walkway to SH10 - via bowling green (Est $30,000)

ix) Michie Street – Start to Playschool (Est $30,000)

b) Identify and recommend to Council a list of footpaths from the above priority safety programme to the values of $150,000 to be constructed 100% funded from Far North District Council Funds.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

NZTA Footpath Funding

Government, through the Ministry of Transport, published the Road to Zero strategy for 2020-2030 and the initial 3-year implementation plan in December 2019, prior to the COVID pandemic.

The Road to Zero strategy prioritises funding commitments for its transport vision, and ‘new footpaths’ were placed at number 4 on a list of 15 strategic priorities for funding to ‘Enhance safety and accessibility of footpaths, bike lanes and cycleways’.

Due to the global pandemic, some funding prioritises have been reorganised to enhance general road safety with more stringent guidelines.

The outcome of any funding changes will not be realised until August/September 2021.

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community – Footpath Matrix Amendments

While the former footpath matrix methodology was accepted by Waka Kotahi NZTA, under the new central government strategy additional safety and accessibility measures have been added. The new matrix attributes are now as follows:

· School (within certain distance)

· Tourist Route

· Berm Space

· Existing Footpath

· Existing Link

· Trip Generation

· NEW - Posted and Operated Speed Limit

o Posted = Roadside signs/Legal Speed Limit

o Operating = the speed at which drivers operate the vehicle

· NEW - One Network Framework (ONF)

o The ONRF is the national classification system. It is used to determine the function of our roads and streets, and to inform decision making.

· NEW - Crash Analysis System (CAS)

o CAS is a data collection system which provides tools to analyse and map crashes and enables users to identify high risk locations and monitor trends and crash sites. The source data is gathered from NZ Police crash reports.

· NEW - Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

o AADT is a measure used primarily in transportation planning, engineering and retail location. It is the total volume of vehicle traffic of a highway or road for a year divided by 365.

These new measures have now been accepted by Waka Kotahi NZTA.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

There is a total of $150,000 available for New Footpaths in the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward. This is allocated by Far North District and is 100% funded from Far North District funds.

An additional $320,000 per annum, has been proposed to Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency for new footpath projects from the 2021/2022 to 2023/2024 financial years (3-year programme). The annual programme should attract the revised financial assistance rate (FAR) of 69%.

While the former footpath matrix methodology was accepted by Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency, under the new central government strategy additional safety and accessibility measure have been added. The new matrix attributes are now as follows:

· School (within certain distance)

· Tourist Route

· Berm Space

· Existing Footpath

· Existing Link

· Trip Generation

· NEW – Posted and Operating Speed Limit

o Posted = Roadside signs/Legal speed limit

o Operating = the speed at which drivers operate the vehicle (where available)

· NEW – One Network Framework (ONF)

o The ONF is the national classification system. It is used to determine the function of our roads and streets, and to inform decision making.

· NEW – Crash Analysis System (CAS)

· NEW – Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)

o AADT is a measure used primarily in transportation planning, engineering and retail locality. It is the total volume of vehicle traffic of a highway or road for a year divided by 365.

The new attributes have been accepted by Waka Kotahi NZTA and now been placed into the footpath matrix to further analyse the highest ranked footpaths to be delivered across Far North District.

It is important to note that CAS data has been explored to highlight where the Far North District are experiencing the greatest pedestrian risk. NTA staff analysed data from 2010-2021 for all crashes involving a pedestrian, the results are shown in the below heat map:

Due to early notification of potential funding shortfall from Waka Kotahi NZTA, other programmes are being explored to deliver pedestrian improvement programmes. These could be raised pedestrian platforms and speed tables, delivered through Waka Kotahi NZTA’s new activity class of ‘Road to Zero – Safety Network Programme’.

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

It is recommended that the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward agrees that the Northland Transport Alliance for Far North District implement footpaths as prioritised in the ‘top 9’ from the footpath matrix, (budget $320,000) as follows:

1. Parnell Street Rawene - Hospital to Clendon Esplanade (Est $500,000)

2. Manning Street Rawene - Existing to House #54 Manning Street (Est $70,000)

3. Koutu Point Road Koutu - SH12 to 68 Koutu Point Road (Est $340,000)

4. Old Wharf Road Omapere - SH12 to Wharf (Est $40,000)

5. Freese Park Road Omapere – Old Wharf Road to end (Est $40,000)

6. Horeke Road Okaihau - Existing to house 2054 (Est $230,000)

7. Honey Street – Parnell Street to End (Est $120,000)

8. Taumataiwi Street Opononi – Walkway to SH10 - via bowling green (Est $30,000)

9. Michie Street – Start to Playschool (Est $30,000)

These new footpaths are proposed as funding from Waka Kotahi NZTA is made available, with a FAR of 69%. The order in which they are delivered will be determined by the available fund for each financial year.

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward will still need to identify a list of footpaths for delivery for 2021/2022 financial year, to be constructed from Far North District Council funds (100%). The Community Ward could opt to prioritise from the ‘top nine’ proposed new footpaths or nominate another ‘new footpath’ for consideration (budget $150,000).

3) PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There is a total of $150,000 available for New Footpaths in the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Ward. This is allocated by Far North District and is 100% funded from Far North District funds.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

Nil

Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / Compliance Schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance Requirement	Aromatawai Kaimahi / Staff Assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	This is a footpath programme and is of low significance.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Land Transport Act, National Policy Statement, NZ Standards 4404, Policy #5004 Footpaths
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	There is limited district wide relevance; footpaths are a public asset. The Community Board have the delegated authority to approve footpath priorities.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	Not applicable.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities).	Footpath standards include provision for design for elderly and disabled. Communities are in support of footpaths being built to current standard.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Footpaths are subsidised by Waka Kotahi NZTA with a financial assistance rate of 69%. FNDC has planned for $320,000 to be funded by Waka Kotahi NZTA. The application is awaiting approval. The Community Ward influences 100% of Far North District Rate Payer funds up to $150,000 for footpaths.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Applicant	Project	Requested	Recommended	Comments	Community Outcome(s)	Type
a) Bay of Islands Canine Association	Community dog-training and education	$4928 50%	$4928 50%	This is the second year that the association have come to the Board for funding, with a duplicate application going to Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Board. As they have funds remaining ($550), they have not provided a project report form, but have indicated that the classes they have run have been well-attended and supported.	i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable ii) Proud, vibrant communities	Community Development
b) Kaikohe and Districts Sportsville	Bike track feasibility study	$3200 50%	$3200 50%	Sportsville are working with Ākau Design and the NZ Police on the possibility of developing a moto-x track in the Kaikohe area as part of a larger picture with the Cycle Trail, a learner’s bike trail and a pump/BMX track. This would benefit the community by getting bikes (including motorbikes) off the streets and into a purpose-built area.	i) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable ii) Proud, vibrant communities	Infrastructure

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting Agenda

2 June 2021

7 Information Reports

7.1 Update on Speed Limit Bylaw Review

File Number: A3177116

Author: Roger Ackers, Manager - Strategy Development

Authoriser: William J Taylor MBE, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy (Acting)

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To update the Kaikohe and Hokianga Community Board on the Speed Limit Review Programme, including the review process and upcoming consultations.

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

The purpose of this item is to provide the Community Board with background to the ongoing speed review programme. The paper also includes an overview of the current speed review programme, prioritisation, and review process. The item also provides information on upcoming consultation and how the Board can provide input into that process.

The rolling review of all speed limits in Far North District is being undertaken as part of the implementation of the National Road Safety Strategy: Road to Zero: A Road Safety Strategy for New Zealand 2020-2030.

TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board receive the report Update on Speed Limit Bylaw Review.

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

Far North District Council is a Road Controlling Authority (RCA) within the Far North District and has a statutory role in managing the District’s local roads (except State Highways), including the setting of speed limits. This statutory role as an RCA is set out under the Land Transport Act 1998, which also enables Council to make a bylaw that fixes the maximum speed of vehicles on any road for the safety of the public, or for the better preservation of any road (Section 22AB(1)(d)).

As part of the national Road Safety Strategy: Road to Zero: A Road Safety Strategy for New Zealand 2020-2030, Northland Transportation Alliance (NTA), as part of the Far North District (Council) is undertaking a rolling review of speed limits across the District. This is part of a Northland wide speed limit review project and is being undertaken in coordination with other Road Controlling Authorities, including Whangarei District Council, Kaipara District Council and Waka Kotahi (NZTA).

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

Speed Limit Review Program

The speed limit review programme is part of a region-wide project to reduce serious injury and fatal crashes on Northland roads, in part by setting safe and appropriate speeds that better reflect the road environment.

The programme is coordinated with both Kaipara and Whangarei Districts which enables cross boundary issues to be addressed. NTA also coordinates with Waka Kotahi (NZTA) who are responsible for managing the State Highway network.

NTA has recently completed and implemented a review of speed limits in the Waimate-Okaihau-Kaeo area. This review was the first significant speed review to be completed in Northland. The next area to be reviewed is:

· Kaitaia-Awaroa

· Broadwood-Kohukohu

· Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe Ninety Mile Beach

· Moerewa urban area

Prioritisation of Reviews

All speed limits in the Far North will be reviewed over time in a rolling review. To achieve this, NTA, in collaboration with FNDC are taking a catchment-based approach where each review will cover a significant number of roads within an identified catchment area. This approach has been taken to:

· Ensure an efficient review process that aligns with Council’s resources and budgets

· Reduce the number of speed limit inconsistencies where a lower quality road has a higher speed limit than a connecting high-quality road

· Avoid community engagement fatigue.

Catchment areas are prioritised based on risk. A variety of data is utilised, including crash data, vehicle movement and road environment information to assign every road in Northland a risk rating. The National Road Safety Strategy and Speed Management Guidance requires the RCA to prioritise the top 10% high risk roads.

The high-risk roads are identified, and a catchment area is extrapolated from those roads to determine a reasonable review area. The first catchment areas to be reviewed are those that have the highest risk rating, and where a speed review will have the greatest impact on fatal and serious injury crash reduction.

Prioritisation based on risk is essential to ensure that the districts high risk roads are addressed first. Secondary to risk, other aspects that influence the prioritisation process include:

· Co-ordination of cross-boundary review areas within other Council areas, for example, Russell Road.

· The benefits of combining two catchment areas into one review, for example, Kaitaia-Awaroa and Broadwood-Kohukohu catchment areas.

· The implementation of related legislation or policy commitments, for example: Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe Beach Management Plan as part of the Te Hiku Iwi Treaty of Waitangi Settlement legislation.

The Kaitaia-Awaroa Road has the highest crash risk rating in Northland and is currently the highest priority for a speed review to be undertaken.

Community Board Input into the Kaitaia-Awaroa; Broadwood-Kohukohu; and Moerewa Review

The Review area incorporates the areas set out in the attached maps.

A Draft Statement of Proposal (SOP), setting out proposed new speed limits and the principal reasons for the proposed speed limits has been prepared. In accordance with Council delegations, the Statement of Proposal will be presented to the Strategy and Policy Committee to approve for consultation purposes on 15 June 2021.

Subject to approval and media publication, the SOP will be publicly notified in the week ending 25 June 2021. Submissions will be sought over a six-week period, which will allow for additional community engagement events to run alongside the submission process.

The SOP is supported by Technical Reports and other background information to enable the community to make informed submissions. The additional information will be available on Council’s website. Submitters are provided the opportunity to present their views to Council at a Hearing.

Community Board members will have the opportunity to provide feedback on proposals. To enable this, the SOP will be circulated to Community Boards once it is approved by the Strategy and Policy Committee.

An engagement plan is currently being developed. This Plan will incorporate the use of local media, Council website, electronic and social media and drop-in sessions to reach the widest cross section of the community as possible. The Plan will also identify strategies to engage with Māori within the review area.

Forward Programme

The speed limit review programme is being undertaken as a regional project in collaboration with all three districts and Waka Kotahi. This allows for coordination of speed reviews on cross boundary roads and consistency throughout Northland.

The current forward programme for the Far North District includes:

Catchment Area	Planned Notification
Kerikeri – Bay of Islands	November 2021
Aucks Road – Russell	November 2021
Old Russell Road	2022 to be coordinated with Whangarei District Council
Kawakawa	2022 to be coordinated with Whangarei District Council

It should be noted that the setting of Speed Limit Rule 2017 is currently being reviewed. Any changes to this Rule may impact on the current forward programme.

Experience to date shows that the entire speed review process, from start to implementation takes between 6 and 12 months. This allows for significant procurement issues associated with Covid-19 related delays in supply chains and to ensure that implementation is undertaken within current Council budgets.

Next steps

A Statement of Proposal setting out proposed new speed limits will be produced. Once approved by the Strategy and Policy Committee, the SOP will be circulated to Community Boards for information and feedback at the 7 July 2021 Community Board meeting.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications associated with this agenda item and report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Kaitaia Awaroa Road Speed Limit Review Area Map - A3177185 ⇩

2. Kohukohu Broadwood Speed Limit Review Area Map - A3177187 ⇩

3. Moerewa Speed Limit Review Area Map - A3177186 ⇩

[1] It should be noted that the Coastal Erosion Hazard Zones set out in the application AEE are based on the earlier 2017 release as opposed to the 2021 release because the more recent maps were not available at the time the report was prepared. The use of the older data does not materially affect the overall assessment of coastal hazard exposure.

[2] Ministry for the Environment (2017). Preparing for coastal change: A summary of coastal hazards and climate change guidance for local government.

Community Fund Account balance as at 1 July 2020	$115,902.00
· Plus, uncommitted funds from 2019-20 carried forward	$40,545.99
· Plus, Unspent from 2018/19 - Matihetihe School support children participating in regular sporting activity during 2019 winter season	$85.00
· Plus, Unspent from 2018/19 - Rawene Golf Club Inc. to assist with the cost of The Hokianga Golf Fun Day 2019	$115.79
· Plus, Unspent from 2019/20 - Kaikohe Community & Youth Centre Trust for installation of the basketball court and hoops at Memorial Park	$21,019.01
· Plus, Commitments from 28/06/17 meeting towards Junior Bike Park	$14,376.54
· Less funds granted and uplifted to 30 April 2021	$107,893.00
· Less funds not uplifted from 09 December 2020 for Kaikohe Business Association	$4,750.00
· Less funds not uplifted from 03 February 2021 for North Harbour A&P Society	$3,720.00
Community Fund Account balance as at 30 April 2021	$75,681.33