Minutes of Project and Monitoring Meeting - Wednesday, 22 February 2023

Project and Monitoring Meeting Minutes

22 February 2023

MINUTES OF Western Bay of Plenty District Council
Project and Monitoring Meeting No. PMC23-1
HELD IN THE Council Chambers, Barkes Corner, 1484 Cameron Road, Tauranga
ON Wednesday, 22 February 2023 AT 11.00am

1 Present

Cr D Thwaites (Chairperson), Cr A Sole, (Deputy Chairperson), Cr T Coxhead, Cr R Crawford, Cr G Dally, Mayor J Denyer, Cr M Grainger, Cr A Henry, Cr R Joyce, Cr M Murray-Benge, Deputy Mayor J Scrimgeour and Cr A Wichers

2 In Attendance

J Holyoake (Chief Executive Officer), G Allis (Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group), R Davie (General Manager Strategy and Community), A Ali (Chief Financial Officer), A Curtis (General Manager Regulatory Services), J Paterson (Transportation Manager), P Watson (Reserves and Facilities Manager), J Rickard (Community and Strategic Relationships Manager), G Golding (Governance Manager), E Bernard (Risk and Assurance Manager), H Wi Repa (Governance Technical Support), J Osborne (Governance Support Administrator), and B Clarke (Senior Governance Advisor)

COMMUNITY BOARDS

R Goudie (Chairperson, Waihī Beach Community Board)

others in attendance

National Road Carriers Association

James Smith, (Chief Operating Officer)

Community Māra Kai Project

Pippa Coombes, (Environmental Coordinator, Live Well Waihī Beach)

Rose Stocks, (Architect)

One Member of the Media (SunLive), and as listed in the minutes.

3 Apologies

Nil

4 Consideration of Late Items

Nil

5 Declarations of Interest

Cr Alan Sole declared an interest in agenda item 9.1, in relation to the Community Mara Kai (food garden) at Waihi beach, as he was a member of the organisation presenting.

6 Public Excluded Items

Nil.

7 Public Forum

A Kyle Beetham - Woodland Road speed limit/road safety - Council’s responses

Mr Beetham, a resident of Te Puna, owned a property at 177 Woodland Road, Katikati, and addressed the Committee with the following concerns:

· Several of his neighbours had raised concerns about speeds/road safety on Woodland Road, since 2001.

· They had sought action as there were incidents on the road about every three months.

· Engineers had favoured their own models and gave the lowest priority to the concerns of residents, who knew the road well.

· The speed had finally been reduced following a serious incident.

· Council’s responses to the issues raised by residents appeared flawed, as there was inefficiency and inability to recognise what was important.

· It was hoped that under the ‘Road to Zero Plan’ there would be a change in approach, and residents’ concerns would be properly addressed.

Mr Beetham provided a folder of documentation relating to Woodland Road issues of concern to residents (dated), and Council’s responses, (catalogued in sections).

Mr Beetham responded to questions of clarification as follows:

· Residents requested a 70kph speed limit be applied in Woodland Road, which was sensible. Even following the serious incident, the current speed limit was 80kph.

· His primary concern was that residents’ feedback was not being taken seriously or valued, despite their knowledge of local roads. Acknowledging this should be part of the process.

· Woodland Road was a dead-end road, most traffic was generated by residents/locals. As it was a long road, people tended to travelled faster in the first 1.5km of the road, and that was where incidents usually occurred.

At the request of the Chairperson, the Deputy Chief Executive advised that Waka Kotahi (NZTA) categorised all roads nationally in terms of ‘safe and appropriate’ speed. Council’s speed limit recommendations for roads would be a further part of the process.

The Transportation Manager advised that Waka Kotahi had not supported speed limits of 70kph or 90kph in the past, but with the ‘Road to Zero Plan’ (New Zealand’s Road Safety Strategy 2020-2030), and the categorisation of all roads in the country, it was possible that Woodland Road could have a ‘safe and appropriate’ speed of 60kph.

The Chairperson noted that speed limits were not solely the decision of Council, but must have input from Waka Kotahi and Police.

In response to a question, the Deputy Chief Executive advised that under the new ‘Road to Zero Plan’, Council now had less input into speed limits.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Beetham for speaking and staff for their responses.

CHANGE TO ORDER OF BUSINESS

The Chairperson requested the following changes to the order of business for the reasons outlined in the below motion.

Resolution PMC23-1.1

Moved: Cr M Grainger

Seconded: Cr T Coxhead

1. That agenda Item 8.1, being “SCADA System Presentation”, be dealt with in resumed open session immediately following the conclusion of confidential business, due to the availability of the presenter; and

2. That agenda Item 9.1, being “Town Centre Development Fund Allocation” be dealt with following items 9.2, being “Proposal to Lease and Reclassification - Waihī Beach Plunket Reserve and Beach Road Recreation Reserve, Waihī Beach - Community Mara Kai (Food Garden)” and Item 9.3, being “Operational Risk and Scorecard Report Quarterly Update Ending December 2022”, due to the period of time required for the Operational Risk presentation.

Carried

8 Presentations

8.1 National Road Carriers Association - Roading Transport Presentation

The Chairperson welcomed James Smith, Chief Operating Officer, National Road Carriers Association, who spoke to a powerpoint presentation.

Scope of Presentation:

· Introduction – represent/advocate for Commercial Transport Operators nationwide

· Road transport industry - Facts and Figures

· Roading network – Challenges with State Highways and Local Roads,

· Congestion - Lack of long term coordinated planning – Western Bay seasonal industries creating peaks

· Issues facing transport – staff, infrastructure, rising costs, decarbonisation and others.

Mr Smith responded to questions as follows:

· They were pushing hard with Central Government to get increased funding from Waka Kotahi, which was currently 2,400km behind on the State Highway Renewal Project. That situation had occurred because funding had been reallocated by successive Governments to other projects. To address that deficit, Minister Hon. Michael Wood had ensured additional funds into the Land Transport Fund over the last two years. Unfortunately, New Zealand had successive weather events which had impacted the North Island more than the South Island.

· There were multiple contributors to the $24.3M Land Transport Fund. Currently, around 55% of that fund was from road users, and the balance came from Central and Local Government. Funding for cycleways came from Central Government. As there was such a deficit of investment and projects were continually being set aside, more of that money needed to be tipped into critical infrastructure, not just “nice to haves”.

· Decarbonisation would not stop the need for good roads. Diesel trucks would stop being made and there were already electric trucks on the road. Electric trucks were generally heavier, came with a tonnage penalty and were extremely expensive, e.g. diesel trucks cost $80,000, electric trucks cost $250,000, with only half the productivity out of it.

· The industry was undergoing change, and the Government needed to get serious about quality pavements and move away from chipseal to better products that performed well, lasted longer and were more resilient to adverse weather events (they allowed better drainage). They were pushing for a 50-year minimum plan for transport infrastructure to avoid the impacts of political changes.

They were encouraging the Government to address funding issues by going through all the channels to get the message across. They did not want to see gains made under the one regime lost under another.

· There were frustrations with local roads when lane widths were taken up and were too narrow to start with. Some areas identified key freight connector routes to businesses. It was about getting connectivity from the commuter hub to the Port.

· On the State Highway network, SH29 was a big issue that should have been addressed as it was a connection to the Port, and the long term future of the Kaimai Hills. Increasing rail capacity was needed, as some members were desperate to use rail but could not due to lack of capacity.

· In terms of damage to roads, most responsible operators had 90kph speed ‘hard wired’ in, and adhering to that speed resulted in 13-17% fuel/cost savings. They actively encouraged members to have a speed policy in place. There had been some evidence in the Waikato where some speed limits were altered to produce a better flow and was about the total journey time. If people saw operators exceeding 90kph they should let the association know.

· In terms of potential for the Kaimai tunnel, it would be more efficient if grades could be reduced, particularly for electric trucks. Decarbonisation had raised it again. There was little political will for this but it was on the list of considerations.

The Chairperson thanked Mr Smith for the presentation.

Resolution PMC23-1.2

Moved: Cr A Sole

Seconded: Cr M Murray-Benge

1. That the Executive Assistant, Infrastructure Group’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘National Road Carriers Association - Roading Transport Presentation’, be received.

2. That the presentation from the National Road Carriers Association on 22 February 2023 be received.

Carried

9 Reports

9.1 Proposal to Lease and Reclassification - Waihī Beach Plunket Reserve and Beach Road Recreation Reserve, Waihī Beach - Community Mara Kai (Food Garden)

Cr Alan Sole had declared an interest in agenda item 9.1 and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

The Committee considered a report from the Reserves and Facilities Manager, who Introduced the report, noting the following:

· The Waihī Beach Community Led Development Society had applied to Council to lease an area of Beach Road Recreation Reserve for a Community Māra Kai.

· The Waihī Beach Plunket Reserve was currently classified ‘Local Purpose Reserve’ (Plunket Rooms) and would need to be reclassified to ‘Local Purpose Reserve’ (Community Use).

· The Committee must consider ‘in principle’ what had been applied for, as this area of land would be occupied by another community use, and the wider community must be given the opportunity to submit during public consultation.

· Once the consultation process was completed, submissions and a further report would be brought back to the full Council, as under the Reserves Act 1977, the full Council was the ‘administrating body’ under the Reserves Act and would make the ultimate decision.

· The project was in response to a community initiative and was proposed under the criteria of Council’s Community Gardens Policy.

Pippa Coombes, Environmental coordinator for ‘Live Well Waihī Beach’ spoke to a PowerPoint presentation noting the follows:

· After researching previous initiatives in Waihī Beach and why they had failed, they had been designing a Community Māra Kai, and were cognisant of including indigenous and cultural heritage.

· Community gardens provided community resilience nationally and internationally.

· There were over 3,000 permanent residents at Waihī Beach, with a wide diversity of social and economic backgrounds.

· The Toi Te Ora Health Modelling Population Survey 2020 for Western Bay of Plenty showed that 27% of respondents, (at that time), indicated they were worried about not having enough money to buy food, including nutrient-rich fruit and vegetables that were needed.

· On the project journey they had worked with Hapu, Waihī Beach Cchool, Menzshed and many different people within the community. They had formed a management group, including Rose Stocks, who had volunteered many hours to assist.

· They now had a preliminary plan and the design. Matariki Maarakai embodied the twelve permaculture principles and the nine stars.

· They worked with the children at Waihī Beach. Guidelines had been food sovereignty and local history.

· They sought to ensure community cohesion, resilience and sustainability. The project had been an inspirational learning experience. This was the first Māra Kai of its kind in New Zealand.

· It was not just a community garden, it was a facility. They sought to have children of all abilities come to the garden and enjoy the learning opportunity and garden. There would be sensory gardens particularly helpful to autistic children. All the gardens would be accessible to provide an area where the community could connect.

· They had sent a survey out to over 3,000 people and 84% of the community agreed with the proposal.

Rose Stocks, spoke to a powerpoint presentation, showing the garden on a site location plan, and the extend of land desired for use. She noted the following:

· She had over twenty years experience as a registered Architect and was working to contribute to the project design.

· They had taken the Matariki Star literally in planning for the design, and the main Matariki stars were at the heart of the garden. They could overlay a number of principles of sustainability and permaculture.

· The management group were aware the park was used for sports activities for children and wanted to retain that.

· They had been fortunate to work with a talented Landscape Designer who helped with a variety of garden types, and provided the ability to extend and showcase different techniques. That provided the opportunity for people to learn.

Ms Coombes and Ms Stocks responded to questions as follows:

· In terms of the previous community garden at Wilson Park, there had been a lot of activity to begin with, but also complaints and Police scrutiny. It may have been difficult to remain motivated, and the location may not have worked. For that reason they had started from scratch, providing a proposal to Council and to the community seeking to inspire and engage them.

· They had looked at several sites and this site had high visibility, which helped people to find it. It had to be a visible and vital part of the community for this to work.

· They had spoken to the neighbours who were involved and keen for the garden to be in place.

· The group would employ a part time coordinator who would take bookings, would organise working bees to bring people into the garden and get involved. It really was a community-based project.

· They would employ a part-time coordinator so people could book and be guided around the garden and enjoy it, whether they were actively participating or not.

· They had added security matters to the management plan. There would be spiked fencing, but they were hoping to train Manuka and Eucalyptus around it to soften the impact.

Staff responded to questions as follows:

· The decision today was a decision ‘in principle’ whether to agree or disagree to advertise the intent to the wider public, to lease the area for the purposes outlined. Following public consultation for a one-month period, a report would be provided to full Council, where the ultimate decision rested.

· The garden would be just a little way down from the Beach House Café.

· They had added a Security Management Plan and there would be some fencing, with blackberry. Security gardens assisted alleviating crime in the area.

At the invitation of the Chairperson, the Waihī Beach Community Board Chair Ross Goudie noted the project was known about and the presentation had been included on the Board’s agenda for it’s Monday, 27 February 2023 meeting, as the Board wished to support the initiative.

The Chairperson thanked Ms Coombes and Ms Stocks for their presentation.

Resolution PMC23-1.3

Moved: Mayor J Denyer

Seconded: Cr R Joyce

1. That the Reserves and Facilities Manager’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘Proposal to Lease and Reclassification – Waihi Beach Plunket Reserve and Beach Road Recreation Reserve, Waihī Beach – Community Māra Kai (Food Garden) be received.

2. That the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

3. That the Project and Monitoring Committee approves, in principle, the Waihī Beach Community Led Development Society Inc’s proposal to lease areas totalling approximately 2094m2, being Lots 9-11 and 22-24 DP 17197.

4. That if approved, the Project and Monitoring Committee agrees in principle to the reclassification of the Waihī Beach Plunket Reserve, as shown in this report, from ‘Local Purpose Reserve (Plunket)’ to ‘Local Purpose Reserve’ (Community Use).

5. Subject to item 3 and 4 above, if approval in principle is given, that staff be directed to publicly notify the proposal in accordance with Section 119 and 120 of the Reserves Act 1977 and that any submissions or objections following the submission period be reported back to Council.

6. If approval is given, such approval must not be construed by the applicant as a guarantee that all other consents required by policy, by law, regulation or statute, will be forthcoming.

Carried

9.2 Operational Risk and Scorecard Report Quarterly Update Ending December 2022

The Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group introduced the report, noting there were two parts to the report, the six-monthly scorecard report provided more detail around project status, and secondly, an overview would be provided on topical issues, and in particular, storm damage.

Scope of Presentation:

· Storm damage from Anniversary weekend event and Cyclone Gabrielle.

· No.4 Road Bridge (retrieval old bridge, temporary bridge).

· Kirikiri Stream Bridge and ford.

· Sight improvements Manoeka Road.

· Wairoa Road under slip.

· Oropi Gorge Road over slip.

· Old Kaimai Road under slip.

· Oropi Road bridge under slip.

· Ōmokoroa Peninsula Slips.

· Ōmokoroa Peninsular.

· Te Puna Station Road overview/closure.

The Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group and Transportation Manager spoke to a powerpoint presentation and video footage, noting the following:

· In terms of the two storm events, the Anniversary weekend event had done more damage in the region than Cyclone Gabrielle, and compared to other parts of the country, the damage was not as significant in relation to Cyclone Gabrielle. However, the estimated damage here was between $15-20M, which was significant. There were over thirty sites with under slips, and over slips plus extensive damage to the No. 4 Road Bridge.

· In some cases, assessments were being undertaken as to whether to reinstate to two lanes or not. Te Puna Station Road was one of those in question, and the level of repair that could be undertaken.

· In the past, where a big under slip might have cost $500,000 now it would cost close to one million to repair. The cost of proper repairs was ramped up. They were looking at a programme of two years to work through the repair process.

· Waka Kotahi (NZTA) national contractor, Downers, would continue to organise getting the bridge onsite. Council would have to protect that bridge once installed, and try to maximise the turning circles on and off the bridge on both sides to maximise the productivity of the truck and trailers. If trucks did not follow their turning circle and cut the corners the bridge was at risk from a collision. Council was putting in as much protection as it could, but also sought to maximise productivity of the industry when they started their packing on 20 March 2023.

· Council’s timeframe, based on the programme as advised in the newsletter, had not changed. The bridge was expected to be in place in early March 2023. The earthworks, protection works and approach works would be ongoing.

Staff responded to questions as follows:

· Instability at one end of the bridge had been resolved by using piles, but the piling operation and Geotech work had added to the timeframe. Council wanted a resolution that was safe and lasting.

· In terms of the removal of the damaged bridge sections, the intention was to undertake that at same time. Council had accepted the Demolition Plan. The Contractor would access it by pulling it downstream. Council had agreement from the property owner to use their land downstream of the bridge. It would be broken into manageable pieces first, pulled out of the way initially, then transported off the site.

12.14pm Cr Henry entered the meeting.

· The bailey bridge was Plan A, but there were other contingency plans. Given the national situation, there was potential that it might have been used in the Hawkes Bay. For Council and the residents of No.4 Road, this gave them the answer they were looking for and provided good access until the building of the new bridge could happen. Building the new bridge would be a priority in Council’s work programmes.

· There was ability, in the case of hardship, to apply for a higher percentage of funding, but that process was not clear at this time, or whether Council would be eligible. In terms of the announcement made yesterday, Council understood that, of the $250M the Government had released, that would go into the Land Transport Fund Emergency Categories, and would be distributed across state highways and KiwiRail.

· The previous day staff had driven around damaged sites with WestLink and the Waka Kotahi Investment Advisor, as they had to accept Council’s proposal. They had criteria around whether a site did or did not comply for emergency works funding. The rules effectively limited their expenditure. They understood Council had a lot to do.

· In relation to the Ōmokoroa peninsula, Councils big concern was whether there were any major slips. In this case, none of those houses were threatened. The cranes were working as designed and there were several horizontal wall drains and they had been working. There was an ash layer half way up, and if that mobilised it liquified. That was where slips were coming from. In terms of the slips around the peninsular, these measures had worked well this time. Council would get a 3D model so in future events Council would be able to tell quite quickly how much land had moved.

Scorecard Report for Second Quarter Ending 31 December 2022

The General Manager Regulatory Services spoke in relation to current capital projects, operational issues, property proposals, and trends across Council activities. She Tabled Item 1 and noted the following:

· Tabled Item 1 replaced scorecard information on two pages, (50 and 51), that had been updated since the agenda was produced. This was specifically about the growth statistics, and provided more detail around dwelling consents to give more context, and new lots and additional lots proposed.

· Dwelling consents were down nationally and locally. Those additional lots proposed were specifically from Zest Developments in Te Puke, with 83 new lots.

· On page 47, in terms of development activities, there would be a significant amount of development that would be occurring in Te Puke and Ōmokoroa. Classic Builders had lodged an application to develop 138 new lots at 88 Prole Road, Ōmokoroa, and Ōmokoroa Country Club had an application in to develop 272 new lots. Those were the first significant developments in those areas.

· More detailed information could be provided and the new template could be adapted, if Councillors provided feedback to that effect, for example, growth statistics by Ward.

Staff responded to a question, noting both those developments had been expected.

The Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group, and the Transportation Manager continued speaking to the powerpoint presentation photographs.

Staff responded to questions as follows:

· WestLink would be advising emergency services when roads were closed.

· In terms of the potential closure of Te Puna Road, staff would get traffic counts, and look at observations on the highway. This time of year was getting busier heading into the kiwifruit season. Council had to go through a process with Waka Kotahi in terms of funding. If Council reinstated the road, the site was complex in terms of over slips. Council also had its main wastewater pipeline there. The over slips had been continuing over a number of years, and historically, caused the road to be closed.

· Council’s suggested option in terms of potential closure of Te Puna Road, would be to close the road from Waipuna Hospice to the reserve carpark, but leave the cycleway open, or another option would be to reinstate one lane in one direction. That option would be more expensive, and staff had not done the assessment on that. With Council now facing repair works on thirty separate sites impacted by adverse weather, it was unlikely to be a priority due to the fact there was still clear alternative access. That road would remain closed for some time.

· The intention was to receive community feedback through an engagement process/survey mechanism. Staff would bring back a report to full Council. Currently, it was only two weeks from what had happened, and staff were still in ‘response mode’.

· In terms of rat runs, the number of vehicles at the end of Te Puna Station Road by the main highway, which included the vehicles that went under the bridge, was approximately 600 vehicles. There would always be traffic at that intersection.

· There was a list of roads with issues that Council needed to address. At this stage, other than No.4 Road, Council had no roads closed, but did have some with single lane access.

The Chairperson advised that the meeting would now adjourn and immediately following the meeting would go into Public Excluded session to accommodate the arrival of external guests who had been invited to present to the Committee.

12.45pm The meeting adjourned.

1.12pm The meeting reconvened.

10 Resolution to Exclude the Public

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution PMC23-1.4

Moved: Cr A Sole

Seconded: Deputy Mayor J Scrimgeour

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

B. 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 below.

C. That pursuant to Standing Order 18.2 the following persons be permitted to remain after the public have been excluded because of their specific knowledge of Waka Kotahi Western Bay projects; and Rangiuru Business Park infrastructure respectively, which will assist the meeting to achieve its purpose:

· Representatives from Waka Kotahi (NZTA).

· Representatives from Quayside Holdings.

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
11.1 - Waka Kotahi (NZTA) Update on Western Bay Projects Presentation	s7(2)(c)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely otherwise to damage the public interest	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
11.2 - Quayside - Rangiuru Business Park (RBP) Infrastructure Presentation	s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities	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
11.3 - Infrastructure Operational Risk Report 22 February 2023 - Confidential	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	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

minutes of the Projects and Monitoring Meeting No. PMC23-1,

HELD Wednesday, 22 February 2023,

RESUMED IN OPEN SESSION AT 3.15PM

Present

In Attendance

J Holyoake (Chief Executive Officer), G Allis (Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group), R Davie (General Manager Strategy and Community), A Ali (Chief Financial Officer), J Paterson (Transportation Manager), G Golding (Governance Manager), H Wi Repa (Governance Technical Support), J Osborne (Governance Support Administrator), and B Clarke (Senior Governance Advisor)

COMMUNITY BOARDS

R Goudie (Chairperson, Waihī Beach Community Board)

9 reports [continued from prior open session]

9.3 Town Centre Development Fund Allocation

The Deputy CEO/General Manager Infrastructure Group introduced the report and spoke to a PowerPoint presentation.

Scope of Presentation:

· Town Centre Development Rate.

· 2007-2010 Te Puke.

· 2011-2014 Waihī Beach.

· 2015-2018 Katikati.

· 2019-2022 Ōmokoroa.

· Future allocation.

· Discussion.

· Town Centre Rates.

· Waihi Beach Community Area.

· Katikati Community Area.

· Ōmokoroa Community Area.

· Te Puke Community Area.

Staff responded to questions as follows:

· Whether or not the fund was spent before the end of the year depended on individual projects. Under current rules, it could be set aside for a specific development, e.g. a market square.

· The Economic Strategy Review was a wider body of work that would consider more than simply the policy approach to the Town Centre Rates. Katikati community that raised itself, in addition to that rate included in the UAGC. There were other Community Boards that may need to be involved in this discussion, namely Maketu Community Board and potentially, other areas of the district that pay the Town Centre Rates but had not had a say on this proposal. Should Councillors be considering a “holding pattern” today, and it was thoroughly reviewed through the Long Term Plan (LTP) process and the review of the Economic Strategy, then staff would talk to Community Boards and other community leaders to ascertain their views in relation to it.

· This matter had been brought before the committee now, as this was the first meeting of the Projects and Monitoring Committee and there had not been time pre-election.

· If Councillors chose not to continue with the Town Centre Rate in the LTP, the funds would not be allocated this year and would be removed from the budget for next year. The funds from this year would go into the end of year surplus as they would not be spent.

· When the Town Centre Rate was started, it had a significant effect, for example, $800,000 over four years had an impact for Te Puke, but now that amount would not buy half the amount of work. It may have been better to increase it by a nominal figure each year. However, ultimately, that was the decision of Councillors. Certainly, if it was a larger rate, it would have an increased impact, but when it was set up there was a concept for each of the towns and some staggered timing was in place for each town.

· There was an option to ‘park this’ for a year and hold it in abeyance, to decide next year what is to be done with it. That would leave the money building up and have a starting point when undertaking the Economic Strategy Review. If committing to the same cycle it would feel like committing to the next sixteen years, and there may not be appetite to do that.

The Chairperson thanked staff for their guidance and advised he would move the following motion in order to enable discussion.

Motion:

Mover Cr D Thwaites,

Seconder Mayor J Denyer

1. That the Executive Assistant, Infrastructure Group’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘Town Centre Development Fund Allocation’ be received.

2. That the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Remove option Part 3, and include option part 4:

4. That it be recommended to Council that the Town Centre Development Rate be allocated on a proportional basis (number of properties in the community board area, each year to Te Puke, Katikati, Waihī Beach and Ōmokoroa).

Amendment:

Mover Cr M Grainger

Seconder Cr A Sole

That Parts 1 and 2 of the report recommendation remain the same, that option Part 3 be removed, and that option Part 4 be amended as follows:

4. That it be recommended to Council that the Town Centre Development Rate be allocated on an equal basis, being 25% amongst the following 4 towns, being Te Puke, Katikati, Waihī Beach and Ōmokoroa.

Before the amendment was put, Cr Murray-Benge notified the Chairperson of a foreshadowed further amendment, should the first amendment be defeated.

The above first amendment was put and declared LOST on the hands.

3.32pm Cr Wichers withdraw from the meeting

Further Amendment:

Mover Cr R Joyce

Seconder Cr M Murray-Benge

That Parts 1 and 2 of the report recommendation remain the same, and that a new Part 3 be as follows:

3. That it be recommended to Council that the Town Centre Development Fund for 2022/23 not be allocated until a full review has been completed.

The above further amendment was put and declared LOST on the hands. The Chairperson then put the original motion as follows:

Original Motion:

Mover Cr D Thwaites,

Seconder Mayor J Denyer

1. That the Executive Assistant, Infrastructure Group’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘Town Centre Development Fund Allocation’ be received.

2. That the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Remove option Part 3, and include option part 4:

The above original motion was put and declared LOST on the hands.

The Chairperson then sought indications from the floor as to whether or not there was appetite for the report recommendation to lie on the table. Councillors indicated agreement and the following motion was put:

Resolution PMC23-1.5

Moved: Deputy Mayor J Scrimgeour

Seconded: Cr A Sole

1. That the Executive Assistant, Infrastructure Group’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘Town Centre Development Fund Allocation’ be received.

2. That the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of low significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

That the item of business being discussed should lie on the table and not be further discussed at this meeting, being agenda item 9.3 recommendation Nos.: 3 and 4, as shown below:

3. That it be recommended to Council that the Town Centre Development Fund be allocated on the following 4-year cycle:

· Te Puke 2023 – 2026

· Waihī Beach 2027 – 2030

· Katikati 2031 – 2034

· Ōmokoroa 2035 – 2038.

4. That it be recommended to Council that the Town Centre Development Rate be allocated on a proportional basis (number of properties in the community board area) each year to Te Puke, Katikati, Waihī Beach and Ōmokoroa).

Carried

9.2 Operational Risk and Scorecard Report Quarterly Update Ending December 2022 - Continued

This agenda item continued the discussion begun prior to the confidential session. The reason the item was not completed in the open session prior, was that the meeting had entered into confidential session to accommodate the arrival of external guests who were invited to present to the Committee.

The Deputy Chief Executive/General Manager Infrastructure group and Transportation Manager spoke to a powerpoint presentation.

Scope of Presentation:

· Crisis response at WBOPDC.

· Incident Management Team or infrastructure business as usual.

· Crisis Management Team.

· Business Continuity Plans.

· Civil Defence Emergency Management.

In response to questions the following was noted:

· The Mayor had declared a State of Emergency, but it was only a short time and this was quickly superseded by the Regional Civil Defence State of Emergency declaration, and the following day Central Government declared a State of Emergency.

· Staff were aware that Maketu had faced some challenges during the adverse weather event, as had been discussed at the Community Board meeting the previous night. There had been a plan to bring different parties together to respond to an event before it happened, but the timing had not worked out. Council would address that and bring forward a report to the Community Committee. It was acknowledged that not all of the District was covered by Community Response Plans or teams, and it was up to communities to drive these forward. Council certainly supported the initiatives, and the events around the country had shown the need for them.

· Communications were not always possible immediately, as staff focused on understanding the events, getting feedback from people on the ground, getting communications from people who were cut off, then getting the necessary work done as quickly as possible. Communications were managed as best they could be under those circumstances.

· It was not easy to lift bridge debris out while the crane was on site, as some of those pieces were 80 tonnes. Demolition experts advised staff to break up debris where it was and pull it out onto the grass area (shown in the photograph), to get it out of the river. There would be rock/concrete breaking and reinforcing as minimum actions for the broken bridge. By using piles they could shorten the length of the bridge and it gave them more potential for tuck and trailer turning. The traffic management was to manage the detour road. They would try to control driver behaviour by having bollards.

Resolution PMC23-1.6

Moved: Cr A Sole

Seconded: Cr R Crawford

That the Executive Assistant, Infrastructure Group’s report, dated 22 February 2023, titled ‘Operational Risk and Scorecard Report Quarterly Update Ending December 2022’ be received.

Carried

4.25pm Cr Crawford, Cr Dally and Deputy Mayor Scrimgeour all withdrew from the meeting.

8 Presentations [CONTINUED]

8.2 SCADA System Presentation

The SCADA Systems Engineer introduced the report and spoke to a powerpoint presentation, noting the following key points:

· The old system was not cost effective or efficient and with hacking into systems more prevalent, Council wanted to increase protection.

· Council was transitioning to a new system. Phase 1 was a tidy up, including telemetry system. This helped to monitor systems and upgrade to more sophisticated systems.

· Phase 2 was to create a Parallel Network, upgrading security and further tidying up solutions.

· Phase 3 was to disconnect from Corporate, enable decommission of the old system, monitor and keep more secure.

· Staff put some databases out on the device network, as if an emergency event had damaged supply, to ensure the database could continue running operations.

· Everything had been backed up to the cloud. The redundancy system on the cloud as well.

· Staff added a new alarm6 system, also saving money for license fees.

· The system now had ongoing cost savings, as a mainstream line of communication.

In response to a question the following was noted:

· If the power was out across the region, the system would still work, as they had database nodes that were already programmed to run automatically. They also had compliance points set on them and they would maintain compliance. The majority of Council’s major sites had generators that could keep things running.

Resolution PMC23-1.7

Moved: Cr A Sole

Seconded: Cr M Murray-Benge

That the SCADA Systems Engineer’s report dated 22 February 2023 titled ‘SCADA System Presentation’ be received.

Carried

13 Information for Receipt

Nil

The Meeting closed at 4.35pm

Confirmed as a true and correct record by Council on 16 March 2023.