Ordinary Meeting of Council – 10 August 2016 – Open Agenda

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Apologies

Nil

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Announcements by the Mayor

Announcements by the Management

Confirmation of Minutes

That the Draft Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday, 29 June 2016 be confirmed as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

That the Draft Minutes of the Extraordinary Meeting of Council held on Wednesday, 13 July 2016 be confirmed as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002

The Council resolves, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council consider, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendations set out in this agenda (including the Public Excluded section).

New Reports

1 Watchman Road Project Partnership...................................................... 4

2 Draft Shade Policy............................................................................. 11

3 Regional Economic Development Strategy ........................................... 16

Reports / Recommendations from the Standing Committees

Reports from Maori Consultative Committee held 3 August 2016......................... 19

1. Orotu Drive Recreation Reserve Revocation.......................................... 19

Reports from Audit and Risk Committee held 22 July 2016

1 Corporate Risk Management Framework.............................................. 25

2 NCC Delegations & Authorities Framework Progress Report................... 26

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 27 July 2016

1 Lee/Meeanee Road Intersection.......................................................... 27

2 Marine Parade Redevelopment Carparks.............................................. 28

3 Street Naming................................................................................... 29

4 Urban Environments Bylaw................................................................. 30

5 Commercial Activities in Reserves....................................................... 31

6 Stopping a Portion of Battery Road...................................................... 32

7 Grants Allocation Subcommittee......................................................... 33

Reports Under Delegated Authority

1 Requests for Official Information........................................................ 34

2 Liquor Licences................................................................................. 37

3 Resource Consents............................................................................ 39

4 Tenders Let...................................................................................... 41

5 Schedule of Documents Executed Under Seal....................................... 43

Public Excluded .................................................................................... 46

Ordinary Meeting of Council – 10 August 2016 – Open Agenda

New Reports

1. Watchman Road Project Partnership

*Type of Report:*	Operational
*Legal Reference:*	Local Government Act 2002
*Document ID:*	300845
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	Jon Kingsford, Director Infrastructure

1.1 Purpose of Report

To obtain Council approval in relation to funding, land purchase and procurement of physical works in association with the Watchman Road Project that is being delivered in partnership with NZTA and Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited.

Officer’s Recommendation

a. That Council approve project funding to the value of $2m (excl GST) on the basis that NZTA subsidy is obtained for the local road portion of the project.

b. That Council agree to NZTA purchasing all parcels of land owned by the Department of Conservation and administered by Napier City Council as identified in Attachment B, for the purposes of delivering the project.

c. That Council approve the sale of a minor portion of leasehold land currently leased to the Westshore Motor Camp as identified in Attachment B, for the delivering of the project in accordance with the Public Works Act.

d. That Council accept that physical works for the project will be procured by NZTA through their procurement processes on a competitive tender basis.

MAYOR’S RECOMMENDATION

That the officer’s recommendation be adopted.

1.2 Background Summary

The driving environment associated with the State Highway 2 (SH2) / Watchman Road intersection and SH2 / Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited (HBAL) access Intersection is unsafe and results in motorists taking more risk than is deemed appropriate.

The New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has developed a project solution that meets the safe system approach to high risk roads and future proofs the network for expected growth.

NZTA have sought a partnering approach with both the Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited (HBAL) and the Napier City Council (NCC) to the delivery of a project that incorporates the intersection of local roads with state highway, a widening of Watchman Road and a new road within the Airport complex that will collectively deliver a significant improvement to motorists using the airport, local roads and state highway.

The design concept is illustrated in Attachment A.

1.3 Issues

The significant issue that this project seeks to address is the significant safety risk presented to motorists by the existing network layout. The current layout has resulted in recent fatalities and to do nothing is not an option.

1.4 Significance and Consultation

The direct cost to Council of $1m is at the value threshold as defined in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy for consultation

Funding of Council’s share will be a mix of financial contributions, new capital and $1m through NZTA subsidy. The direct cost to Council is to be funded from existing budget allowances and therefore will not result in addition cost to ratepayers.

On this basis no further consultation is considered necessary.

1.5 Implications

Financial

Council’s funding share in this project is $2m to be made up as follows:

Roading Capital projects/Transportation Proposals $1,000,000 (excl GST)

NZTA Financial Assistance $1,000,000 (excl GST)

The total project construction cost is currently estimated to be $9m, made up of the following components:

NZTA	$5.528m	(excl GST)
NCC	$2.000m	(excl GST)
HBAL	$1.500m	(excl GST)
Total	$9.028m	(excl GST)

These costs exclude design and consenting costs, which are being met by NZTA directly.

Social & Policy

Not applicable.

Risk

There is some risk associated with entering a partnership on this project at this stage. A great deal of the consultation and design around environmental mitigation measures required to offset any project driven dis-benefits has already been completed. Fundamentally this committed the project to a design solution that is not of Council’s choosing.

Another risk that deserves consideration is associated with project timeframes. The target timeframes for this project are for construction to commence in October and to be completed in March 2017. This construction period in itself has risks associated with the busy nature of Napier’s summer period, however the great risk is associated with the amount of work to be completed within the condensed timeframe. Both of these risks have been communicated to NZTA and they are for the project team to manage.

1.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

1. Agree to a partnership approach to this project (including a partnership in terms of funding) with NZTA managing the design, procurement process and physical works.

2. Reject the partnership approach meaning each section of road will be constructed separately, to differing timeframes.

1.7 Development of Preferred Option

FUNDING

Napier City Council officers have been engaging with NZTA to further develop the project in a partnership approach.

As a result, NZTA have supported an application made by Council to the Regional Land Transport Plan to amend the plan to include the Watchman Road project. This amendment was adopted by the Regional Land Transport Committee and has enabled Council to apply for subsidy at a 51% Financial Assistance Rate against the total cost to Council of $2m.

Funding of Council’s share of this project is as follows:

Annual Plan allowance $ 540,000 (excl GST)

Roading Capital projects (bulk funded) $ 460,000 (excl GST)

NZTA Financial Assistance $1,000,000 (excl GST)

TOTAL $2,000,000 (excl GST)

LAND PURCHASE

In order to construct the integrated project as currently designed, NZTA must purchase several small parcels of land as illustrated in Attachment B.

This shows discreet parcels of land either side of Watchman Road and two parcel of land either side of Pandora Road that are required to deliver the project.

Three of the four parcels of land are Crown derived reserve and therefore in the ownership of the Department of Conservation, but have been vested in trust with Council to oversee the management of the respective reserves.

On this basis, Council approval in principle to NZTA acquiring the land is required to satisfy the land acquisition process.

The fourth parcel of land of the southern side of the Pandora Road approach to the proposed round-a-bout is Council owned freehold/leasehold land. A small quantity of land is required in the corner of this property to enable the full design to be delivered. The sale of this land can occur under the Public Works Act with agreement by both parties to the sale / purchase of the land.

PROCUREMENT

NZTA have proposed to the Project Governance Team (which includes representatives from HBAL, NCC and NZTA) that NZTA process, procedures and resources be utilised to deliver this project.

This includes the procurement of a physical works contractor. Although the exact procurement methodology has not yet been identified, NZTA have agreed that this will be a competitively tendered process.

Given that Council’s own procurement methodology closely follows NZTA’s, there should be no concerns held that the process will not be robust.

1.8 Attachments

a Design Concept ⇩

b Land to be purchased ⇩

Ordinary Meeting of Council – 10 August 2016 – Open Agenda

2. Draft Shade Policy

*Type of Report:*	Procedural
*Legal Reference:*	N/A
*Document ID:*	301433
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	Jessica Wilson, Community Planning Advisor

2.1 Purpose of Report

To seek approval to release the Draft Shade Policy for public feedback. Proposed policy is Attachment A.

Officer’s Recommendation

That approval be given to release of the Draft Shade Policy for public feedback.

MAYOR’S RECOMMENDATION

That the Council resolve that the officer’s recommendation be adopted.

2.2 Background Summary

This policy has been developed in response to submissions to the Council’s Annual Plan requesting provision of shade in public places.

2.3 Issues

Exposure to UVR increases the risk of skin cancer. New Zealanders have a tendency to ‘seek the sun’ and our skin cancer rates are among the highest in the world. Napier City Council provides and supports a range of outdoor facilities e.g playgrounds, recreational outdoor areas, and reserves. Shade provision in these areas may help reduce the impacts of sun exposure.

2.4 Significance and Consultation

This policy does not require a special consultative procedure. The public will be asked to provide input and feedback on the draft policy before the policy is finalised.

2.5 Implications

Financial

Implementation of the Policy will be included as a cost for any new projects and project upgrades. It is likely once shade provision is assessed for existing areas, there may be costs for additional shading. These costs will be absorbed into existing budgets, with priority areas being completed first.

Social & Policy

A shade policy will enhance the health and wellbeing of the City. Where people are outdoors enjoying the many facilities that our City has to offer, exposure to the effects of ultraviolet radiation can be minimized through the provision of adequate shading. People also have a responsibility in minimizing their own exposure to ultraviolet radiation.

Risk

That the public feedback received, requests a broadening of the policy beyond Council’s scope.

1.6 Development of Preferred Option

The draft will be released online and directly to key stakeholders for comment. The final policy will consider the feedback provided.

Next steps	Indicative dates
Release draft policy for public feedback	15 August – 15 September
Collate and summarise feedback Develop final policy and implementation plan	Mid October
Present final policy to Council for approval	November
Initiate implementation plan	December

2.7 Attachments

a Draft Shade Policy ⇩

Ordinary Meeting of Council – 10 August 2016 – Open Agenda

3. Regional Economic Development Strategy

*Type of Report:*	Procedural
*Legal Reference:*	N/A
*Document ID:*	302395
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	James Rowe, Economic Development Manager

3.1 Purpose of Report

To adopt Mataraki – Hawke’s Bay Regional Economic Development Strategy (REDS).

Officer’s Recommendation

That the Regional Economic Development Strategy be adopted.

MAYOR’S RECOMMENDATION

That the officer’s recommendation be adopted.

3.2 Background Summary

The Regional Economic Development Strategy (REDS) for Hawke’s Bay – Matariki - was launched by Government Ministers on 27 July 2016. This announcement was the culmination of nearly two years’ work with broad and deep regional engagement. The project grew out of the earlier (2011) REDS which contained much that was valuable but which was never fully committed to by stakeholders, nor fully implemented. The process started by Business Hawke’s Bay aimed to “refresh” the 2011 REDS, but soon concluded that the region needed a broad, partnered and well-resourced effort to achieve the best result for Hawke’s Bay.

The subsequent work was undertaken by a project team representing the councils, Business Hawke’s Bay, Iwi and Post Settlement Governance Entities and Central Government, with the assistance of consultants, and reporting to a regional Governance Group that is ultimately responsible for delivering the project.

The outcome is an exciting vision for the whole Hawke’s Bay region, a set of aspirational but achievable objectives, a fully engaged strategy, and a detailed action plan. The strategy is a work of strong partnership and high level collaboration between Maori and regional stakeholders.

The Strategy’s focus is very much on jobs and on providing career opportunities and pathways for our people, now and into the future. But we want to encourage innovative and productive businesses that will create good, well-paying jobs and to create a positive and vibrant business culture where the rewards are great for those who have great business ideas.

A set of provisional arrangements will help transition the region towards the adoption of an appropriate and fully researched delivery model for REDS that is planned to be up and running from early 2017.

The strategy will build upon the many recent economic initiatives and emerging opportunities already occurring in Hawke’s Bay, and will provide strong future direction, well-resourced and partnered leadership and delivery of REDS’ core objectives.

A copy of the strategy is Attachment A.

3.3 Issues

The purpose of REDS is to provide strategic direction and a detailed and costed action plan for economic development in Hawke’s Bay for the next five to ten years. REDS is a “living document” that will provide an agile framework for the region and will be able to respond to shifting opportunities and emerging challenges. The success of the strategy will depend on continuing collaboration across all regional organisations involved in the delivery of economic development – including Councils, Maori stakeholder groups, industry groups, business, the social sector, government agencies and central Government.

Delivery of the strategy will require the ongoing support of councils, while recognising that no one single agency will be responsible for delivery all of the strategy. It will require a networked approach. The delivery of REDS will not require councils to give up their own economic development activities, but will allow councils to leverage off REDS regional initiatives and the central Government financial support attached to many of the proposed actions. Councils will continue to provide economic development services to their own communities.

Councils and stakeholders have to be realistic about what can be achieved. A strategy is not a panacea, nor is it a silver bullet for the region. No economic development strategy or delivery model can guarantee regional economic success, nor the flow through benefits to everyone in the community. However, a well-developed and strongly supported strategy can ensure that we as a region focus on deliverables, on developing new economic opportunities, on growing and attracting new talent and skills, and on giving the best support we can to our businesses.

3.4 Significance and Consultation

There was extensive consultation during the REDS process beginning with an engaged scoping process; the development of a detailed survey; over one hundred interviews with key regional stakeholders and businesses; two innovation cafés (workshops), the second of which was designed to capture the thinking and aspirations of younger business owners and entrepreneurs in the region; presentations to Hawke’s Bay Councils in July 2016; and, most importantly of all, a co-designed strategy and action plan with Maori groups.

3.5 Implications

Financial

Many of the action items are to be funded or supported by the Government, as per the recent announcement. This is a very welcome development for the Hawke’s Bay region.

Councils will be required to contribute to the support of the delivery model, but this is currently the subject of an independent investigation of delivery options and this work will be presented separately to councils for later endorsement.

As a living document, the action plan is likely to change in the future, and new items will be added. Individual items in the current action plan that are linked to councils will require a commitment at a future date with integration into Long Term Plans / Annual Plans through the usual council planning processes.

Social & Policy

Not applicable.

Risk

Not applicable.

3.6 Options

The options for Council are to either adopt REDS or to not adopt REDS at this time.

3.7 Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option is to adopt the strategy and continue the support the implementation of the identified actions. The strategy has been developed in consultation with key stakeholders and was taken out to the wider community, iwi and various organisations inviting comment and feedback. The process has produced a truly regional economic development strategy that has been embraced by iwi, government, councils and the local community.

3.8 Attachments

a Regional Economic Development Strategy (REDS) (Under Separate Cover) ⇨

Maori Consultative Committee – 03 August 2016 – Open Agenda

REPORT / RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE STANDING COMMITTEES

MAORI CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE MEETING - 3 August 2016

New Items for Maori Consultative Committee

1. Orotu Drive Recreation Reserve Revocation

*Type of Report:*	Legal
*Legal Reference:*	N/A
*Document ID:*	296220
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	Jon Kingsford, Director Infrastructure

1.1 Purpose of Report

Council wishes to consult with Iwi, in respect of the proposed revocation of a local purpose recreation reserve, currently located adjacent to Orotu Drive, opposite the Kapiti Drive roundabout, within the Parklands Residential Estate.

Officer’s Recommendation

That the proposal to revoke the existing recreational reserve be supported, and that Iwi consent to the proposal, and accept the recommendation.

Maori Consultative Committee's Recommendation

T Aranui / G Reti

That the proposal to revoke the existing recreational reserve be supported, and that Iwi consent to the proposal, and accept the recommendation.

CARRIED

1.2 Background Summary

Previously, the Napier City Council originally held an interest in fee simple in the lands that is now the Reserve.

The land that is now the Reserve was declared a recreation reserve by the Napier City Council in anticipation of the future development of Area 3 of the Parklands Residential Development, with a separate title issuing for the Reserve on 21 February 2012. The area is shown highlighted on the Plan 1 – Attachment A. The Reserve was created as part of Stage 8, being a condition of Resource Consent RMS 07135, for Parkland Area 2.

However, the Reserve has never been developed or used as a recreation reserve and has remained as bare land that is indistinguishable from the fee simple land that surrounds it.

With the subsequent development of the original Master Plan for Park Island, it was proposed that Area 3 and Area 4 of the Parklands Residential Development would be separated by a parcel of land (which is much larger than the Reserve) that would be declared recreation reserve and developed as a sports park. Accordingly, the impact of the revocation of the reservation of the Reserve would be minimal.

Consequently, the subdivision plan for Area 3 of the Parklands Residential Development has been amended so that the proposed residential land is shown overlapping the reserve land, (see highlighted, on Plan 2 – Attachment B), in anticipation of the recreational area being incorporated into the proposed Park Island Sportsground development.

1.3 Issues

The approved subdivision layout for Parklands Area 3 currently shows the reserve overlapping part of the proposed residential development. The revocation of the Reserve will permit the sale of those sections that are shown overlapping the area.

Should the revocation be refused, the reserve shall have to remain as is, and the residential area amended accordingly.

Should any additional recreational space in an adjacent part of the development be deemed necessary, the matter can be addressed as the revised Park Island Master Plan is finalised.

1.4 Significance and Consultation

Pursuant to Section 24(1) of the Reserves Act 1977, the proposed revocation of the Reserve was publicly advertised on Saturday 25 June 2016, in the Hawke’s Bay Today newspaper, inviting the submission of any objections to be made within 4 weeks of the advert being placed.

The submissions period closed on 23 July 2016 9 submissions were received.

1.5 Implications

Financial

Not applicable.

Social & Policy

Not applicable.

Risk

Not applicable.

1.6 Preferred Outcome

As part of the revocation process, the Developer (Napier City Council) wishes to advise Iwi of the proposal to revoke the existing Reserve, and seek input to the proposed revocation. Any feedback from Iwi, will be included in the submission to Council for a formal resolution to revoke the Reserve.

1.7 Attachments

a Plan 1 ⇩

b Plan 2 ⇩

Ordinary Meeting of Council – 10 August 2016 – Open Agenda

PUBLIC EXCLUDED ITEMS

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting, namely:

New Reports

1. Park Island Northern Hub Development

2. Citizens' Civic Awards

Reports from Audit and Risk Committee held 22 July 2016

1. Provisional Capital Plan 2015/16 Progress Report

2. Napier City Council Investment and Debt report

3. Napier City Council Internal Audit

4. Napier City Council Deloitte Report July 2016

5. 2016/17 Insurance Renewal Programme

6. Napier City Council Health & Safety Report

7. Napier City Council Transition of Outlook to the Cloud

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 27 July 2016

1. Waipatiki Beach Holiday Park

2. Grants Allocation Subcommittee Recommendations

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public was excluded, the reasons for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under Section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution were as follows:

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED	REASON FOR PASSING THIS RESOLUTION IN RELATION TO EACH MATTER That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information where the withholding of the information is necessary to:	GROUND(S) UNDER SECTION 48(1) TO THE PASSING OF THIS RESOLUTION 48(1)(a) That the public conduct of the whole or 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:
New Reports
1. Park Island Northern Hub Development	7(2)(b)(ii) Protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
2. Citizens' Civic Awards	7(2)(a) Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
Reports from Audit and Risk Committee held 22 July 2016
1. Provisional Capital Plan 2015/16 Progress Report	7(2)(b)(ii) Protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information 7(2)(h) Enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
2. Napier City Council Investment and Debt report	7(2)(b)(ii) Protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
3. Napier City Council Internal Audit	7(2)(a) Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
4. Napier City Council Deloitte Report July 2016	7(2)(a) Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person 7(2)(c)(i) 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 to prejudice the supply of similar information or information from the same source and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
5. 2016/17 Insurance Renewal Programme	7(2)(i) Enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
6. Napier City Council Health & Safety Report	7(2)(a) Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
7. Napier City Council Transition of Outlook to the Cloud	7(2)(b)(ii) Protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
Reports from Regulatory Committee held 27 July 2016
1. Waipatiki Beach Holiday Park	7(2)(i) Enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
2. Grants Allocation Subcommittee Recommendations	7(2)(b)(i) Protect information where the making available of the information would disclose a trade secret 7(2)(b)(ii) Protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	48(1)A That the public conduct of the whole or 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: (i) Where the local authority is named or specified in Schedule 1 of this Act, under Section 6 or 7 (except 7(2)(f)(i)) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

Meeting Date:	Wednesday 10 August 2016
Time:	3.00pm
Venue:	Main Committee Room 3rd floor Civic Building 231 Hastings Street Napier

Council Members	The Mayor (In the Chair), Councillors Boag, Brosnan, Hamilton, Herbert, Jeffery, McGrath, Price, Pyke, Taylor, White and Wise
Officer Responsible	Chief Executive, Wayne Jack
Administrator	Committee Adminstrator, Judy Buttery

*Type of Report:*	Information
*Legal Reference:*	N/A
*Document ID:*	295790
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	Heather Mabin, Strategic Financial Advisor/Analyst

*Type of Report:*	Legal and Operational
*Legal Reference:*	Traffic Regulations
*Document ID:*	288933
*Reporting Officer/s & Unit:*	Kim Anstey, Planner Policy/Analyst