of Council
|
Meeting Date: |
Wednesday 22 November 2017 |
|
Time: |
3.00pm – 3.29pm 3.56pm – 4.01pm |
|
Venue |
East
Coast Lab Marine Parade Napier |
|
Present: |
The Mayor (In the Chair), Councillors Boag, Brosnan, Dallimore, Hague, Jeffery, McGrath, Price, Tapine, Taylor, White, Wise and Wright |
|
In Attendance: |
Chief Executive, Director Corporate Services, Director Infrastructure Services, Director City Services, Director City Strategy, Director Community Services, Manager Communications and Marketing, Economic Development Manager, Strategic Planning Lead |
|
Administration: |
Governance Team |
Apologies
Nil
Conflicts of interest
Nil
Public forum
Nil
Announcements by the Mayor
The Mayor advised that the base level of noise in the room was quite high due to the building ventilation systems and requested all speakers to maintain a good volume to ensure they were audible.
Announcements by the management
Nil
Local Government Act 2002
|
Council resolution |
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).
|
HEARING OF SUBMISSIONS
Susan Wylie, Friends of the Library
Susan thanked council for the consultation meetings that had been held to discuss the various proposals to in relation to the Civic and Library buildings, and noted that some questions had been answered satisfactorily at those times. However, the Friends of the Library still held some concerns. She noted that the current library location had been purpose built and recently refurbished; the Friends would like to see the library move back into this building as soon as possible. However, should the decision be taken to create a new library building instead, the Friends would like to be involved in these discussions early on.
Fiona Simon, Quest Napier
Fiona acknowledged the need for a site upgrade and made the following comments with regards to the proposal of a hotel for the civic land:
· The best option for a robust return to the community would be to lease rather than sell the land; the lease should be based on market rates.
· While they naturally had some concerns regarding a new competitor, they recognised that there were times when the accommodation in Napier was stretched. Further, the indicative price point of the proposed hotel development was not expected to directly encroach on their own business model as it would be above standard government and corporate rates.
· It was recommended that the hotel should have enough parking allowance to cater for their guests as parking was already at a premium in the town centre.
· It was noted that a restaurant in the hotel would be a welcome addition to the hospitality sector, especially if they offered meals and café style snack options throughout the day. This would benefit guest of the hotel, guests of surrounding accommodation including Quest, as well as the general public.
Mark Rogers
Mark advised that he had attended the public meeting regarding the proposal to move the library to the MTG. He noted that he had concerns regarding the level of information provided at the meeting, which he felt reflected a pattern of previous poor reporting by officers to Council and a lack of leadership from Council in not requiring more and clearer information prior to decision making.
He suggested that more options could have been explored with regards to the Civic and Library Buildings, for example demolishing the Council Chamber.
Mark urged Councillors to become more discriminating in the reports that they accept from officers.
Guy Natusch
Guy advised that he had been involved in the selection of both the present Civic and Library sites, and he still considered the sites the ideal position for a civic administration centre. He believed it would be prudent to have a second opinion of the seismic assessments of each building. He recommended that the current sites be retained and the building be renovated or rebuilt rather than the land being sold or leased for other purposes. He proposed that the original project group from the 1960s could be reformed to consult on a possible rebuild or renovation.
|
Council resolution |
Councillors White / Tapine That the public be excluded from the deliberations of this meeting on the submissions relating to the Civic Building Optimisation consultation. Carried |
The deliberations were undertaken in committee, following which the open meeting reconvened for the purpose of notifying the decision in the open record.
|
Council resolution |
Councillors Wright / Tapine That the meeting be re-opened to the public to notify the decision of Council on the Civic Building Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal. Carried |
Extraordinary Meeting of Council - 22 November 2017 - Open Minutes
Deliberations - Civic Building Site Optimisation
The following points were made during the deliberations:
· Forty percent of the submissions received were in relation to the library; there is a lot of feeling in the community with relation to the library and the feedback provided should be included in any future consultation on the library so it is taken into consideration.
· Whether the land is sold or leased, the decision should ensure that the benefit to the community is maximised. Leaseholding may provide intergenerational benefits and provide some messaging of compromise to elements within the community who are uncomfortable with an asset sale. It was also noted that, should the land be sold, ongoing revenue into the community could still be generated from a hotel through employment, purchasing of local produce, spend at local retailers and events, and so on.
· If the land was sold, it was suggested that the income could be tagged for another public space, or to purchase a long term tenanted building for ongoing returns.
· There is no longer a requirement for a civic administration block to be in the very centre of town and it could be moved towards civic square (for example).
· The current building no longer represents council well, and detracts from council as a responsible employer. There are several civic sites across the city already and there is no need to retain this older building.
· It will be important to emphasise to the public that the detailed seismic assessments have been peer reviewed by specialists in the field Aurecron. This peer review report is publicly available.
· It may need to be reinforced in communications that it is not Council that are building a hotel themselves, but rather that the intent is to attract an internationally recognised hotel brand.
· Concerns raised in submissions received were believed to be appropriately addressed in the officer’s response report.
· A spatial plan analysis for the library building was included in the Statement of Proposal; this included provision for 20% growth, as well as a larger allowance per desk than the temporary accommodation meaning there is some flexibility there also. While some areas of Council still require growth (including the engineering design team for example) any expansion would remain well within the 20% allowance.
New Reports
1. Civic Building Site Optimisation
|
Type of Report: |
Operational and Procedural |
|
Legal Reference: |
Local Government Act 2002 |
|
Document ID: |
399789 |
|
Reporting Officer/s & Unit: |
Fleur Lincoln, Strategic Planning Lead |
1.1 Purpose of Report
The report provides an analysis of submissions received on the Statement of Proposal that will enable Council to divest, whether by way of sale or long-term lease, the site on which the Civic Administration Building is currently located (Site A) to a private developer for commercial development, should it wish to do so. The report also outlines the recommendation to Council on the proposal put forward by the Statement of Proposal, taking into account the views expressed in these submissions.
|
At the Meeting The Mayor noted that a peer review of the Detailed Seismic Assessments for the Civic and Library buildings had already been undertaken. This was completed by Aurecron, specialists in earthquake prone buildings. The ensuing report advised that they agreed with the rating allocated for each building and noted that they believed best practice had been followed in both the modelling and overarching philosophy of the assessments.
|
|
|
|
Officer’s Recommendation a. That Council receive and hear the submissions on the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal. b. That based solely on the written submissions and other feedback received to date (13/11/2017), officers recommend the adoption of the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal as notified.
|
|
Amendment |
That Council a. Receive and hear the submissions on the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal. b. Recommend the adoption of the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal as notified.
|
|
Council Resolution |
That Council a. Receive and hear the submissions on the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal. b. Recommend the adoption of the Civic Administration Site Optimisation Statement of Proposal as notified.
|
PUBLIC EXCLUDED ITEMS
|
Council resolution |
That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. |
Agenda Items
1. Project Trifecta
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: |
|
Agenda Items |
||
|
1. Project Trifecta |
7(2)(h) Enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities 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: |
The meeting moved into committee at 4.01pm
|
Approved and adopted as a true and accurate record of the meeting.
Chairperson .............................................................................................................................
Date of approval ...................................................................................................................... |