Minutes of Sustainable Napier Committee - Thursday, 11 February 2021

Sustainable Napier Committee - 11 February 2021 - Open Minutes

Agenda Items

1. Rodney Green Centennial Events Centre - Flood Damage Report

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	1273098
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Andrew Clibborn, Building Asset Management Lead Debra Stewart, Team Leader Parks, Reserves, Sportsgrounds

1.1 Purpose of Report

To update Council on the remedial work required on the Rodney Green Centennial Events Centre (RGCEC) following the flooding that occurred on the 9^th November 2020. This includes detail on what is and what is not covered by insurance, and the options and costs for remedial work.

To inform Council on seismic and lighting work that could be undertaken while the Centre is closed.

To propose that Council develops a policy for earthquake (EQ) risk acceptance and/or amelioration for buildings owned or occupied by Council.

At the Meeting

Council officers spoke to the report noting:

· The flood repairs in the events centre will replace like for like.

· The repair work should be completed by the end of 2021.

· Additional projects could be carried out alongside the flood repairs whilst the facility is closed, such as replacing the lighting which is noisy and inefficient and seismic and structural improvements.

· The Council has no formally adopted policy on minimum requirements for earthquake rating for Council buildings.

In response to questions from the Committee it was clarified:

· A Council policy for earthquake risk acceptance and/or amelioration for buildings owned or occupied by Council is an important piece of work, but needs to be prioritised against other priority work.

· Any new lighting will need to accommodate the current load capacity of the RGCEC.

· Doing earthquake strengthening of the RGCEC now whilst the facility is closed may save some money but it will not save time.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Simpson / McGrath

The Sustainable Napier Committee:

a. Endorse the proposal to develop a policy for earthquake (EQ) risk acceptance and or amelioration for buildings owned or occupied by Council.

b. Approve funding for new lighting in Rodney Green Centennial Events Centre from the Sportsground Asset Renewal Fund.

c. Acknowledge that the flooding related remedial work is covered by insurance and funding is not required from Council.

Carried

2. Awatoto Waste Futures Hub Proposal

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	1268502
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Cameron Burton, Manager Environmental Solutions

2.1 Purpose of Report

This paper is to communicate the Joint Waste Futures Committee endorsement in principle of the initiative to locate a Waste Futures hub at Awatoto.

Officers now seek an endorsement from Sustainable Napier Committee and Council to commence planning for a Waste Futures Hub based at Awatoto (or such other site deemed suitable), for the purposes of waste processing, resource recovery, waste minimisation and diversion and community engagement.

Before committing resources to conceptualise the initiative for later approval, this paper seeks endorsement in principle of the development of such a facility in this area.

Councillor Browne left the meeting at 11.03am

Councillor Browne returned to the meeting at 11.04am

At the Meeting

The Council officer spoke to the report alongside Michael Quintern, founder of MyNOKE, who delivered a presentation to Council noting:

· Residents could take their waste material to a Waste Futures Hub instead of the landfill. Charity groups could work onsite to redirect recyclable waste, for example timber or fabric.

· MyNOKE could be a potential partner with Council for this project. They use earthworms to compost organic waste such as night soil, algae and weed from waterways, wooden cutlery and compostable packaging.

· Earthworms reduce waste by 80%, whereas normal composting reduces waste by 20%.

· A worm farm can be rotated around a piece of land and crops can be rotated on the same land making use of the rich nutrients which will be produced by the worm farm.

In response to questions the following points were clarified:

· Currently approximately $93,000 per year is being spent on capital renewals at Redclyffe. It is not sustainable in its current state. To bring it up to a sustainable standard a lot more would need to be spent on the site and this would not attract funding from the Waste Minimisation Fund. The business case will include Redclyffe’s current maintenance and operating costs so Council will be able to weigh this up against the cost of a new facility.

· A new facility could attract funding from the Central Government’s Waste Minimisation Fund. Also development could be staged to stay within budget.

· A new facility could be built on the current site, but the size is limiting and there are land stability issues as it is on an old landfill.

· Cost to transfer waste from the proposed new site to the landfill would be higher than from Redclyffe as Awatoto is further away.

· Although the business case has not been costed yet, it is believed there is sufficient budget available to begin the business case and it could be straddled over two financial years to spread the cost out.

· Council officers will consider the ability to have the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the new facility on the same site as they work through the business case process.

· The acquisition of waste for the worm farm and charges for its collection can be a flexible model. At other MyNOKE sites there are some businesses who bring the waste to the site, but also worm farm workers can collect the waste from the producer’s site.

· The Council Officer’s and MyNOKE presentation has been given to the joint Waste Futures Committee and there were Hastings District Councillors at that meeting. They were receptive to the idea.

· A business case would address the communities opinion of building a Waste Futures hub and where the best site for it would be, along with what the economic outcomes of such a facility would be. The business case process can also be halted at any point if necessary.

· The process of converting organic waste to compost using earthworms is not smelly. The Redclyffe Transfer Station has not had any odour complaints and the proposed operation would be tidier operation than that.

ACTION: A report from Council Officers to be presented at the next Sustainable Committee meeting on the current operation and maintenance costs of Redclyffe Transfer Station.

Committee's recommendation

Councillor Wright / Mayor Wise

The Sustainable Napier Committee:

a. Receive the Joint Waste Futures Committee’s endorsement of this initiative.

b. Endorse in principle, the approach of investigating opportunities and the development of a cross-boundary cost-benefit analysis as part of a Business Case for a bespoke Waste Futures Hub.

c. Approve the commissioning of a business case to investigate the viability of a new diversion station/centre including site recommendations, funding opportunities and ownership structures subject to joint funding being received from the Hastings District Council.

Carried

3. Project update Napier Urban Waterways Investigations

Type of Report:	Information
Legal Reference:	Resource Management Act 1991
Document ID:	1283593
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Cameron Burton, Manager Environmental Solutions

3.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this paper is to summarise to the Sustainable Napier Committee the purpose of, and results to date of the Napier Urban Waters Investigations project.

At the Meeting

The Council Officer spoke to the report and in answer to questions clarified:

· All Napier urban waterways are monitored, but there are waterways which flow into these which are not monitored.

· One year of monitoring the waterways does not give enough data to act on. Each year’s samples can be different because of changes in weather patterns, and changes in pollutants entering the waterways during rainfall. A picture can be built up over time from samples taken.

· Pollution issues can be addressed alongside the investigation project, such as through education campaigns.

· As part of the three year project an independent consultant will be engaged to look at the sample results and advise on the way forward.

· High levels of zinc were found in samples. Phosphorus is another pollutant found in samples. When the 1931 Napier earthquake occurred it pushed up a lot of land which had shells in in. It is suspected that shells are now breaking down leading to phosphorus entering our waterways. Phosphorus is not highly toxic, but encourages growth of algae in waterways in warmer months; the possibility of treating this is being investigated.

· The number of sites being tested have been reduced as there were too many to collect samples within the first flush of a rainfall event. The sites dropped were not adding much detail to the sample results.

· Hawke’s Bay Regional Council co-fund the sampling work and we share our results with them.

· Council can only use the funding allocated to this project for monitoring; there is funding available through the 3 waters reform which should enable Council to install some floating treatment wetlands. These could go on the Georges Drive section of the old Tutaekuri bed. This would link well with the cultural values assessment being carried out currently.

· The sampling, analysis and subsequent results of Ahuriri Estuary could be leading the way in knowledge around Estuary’s and their care.

· This project is communicated to community groups through Council meetings.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Brosnan / Simpson

The Sustainable Napier Committee:

a. Note the goals of the Napier Urban Waters Investigations, and the implications of the project’s current results.

b. Note the essential nature of the Napier Urban Waters Investigations in allowing Council to make informed decisions on the best practicable option for improving the quality of fresh water discharging to Te Whanganui-a-Orotū (Ahuriri Estuary).

Carried

4. Report on Napier Water Supply Status End of Q2 2020-2021

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	Enter Legal Reference
Document ID:	1282596
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Catherine Bayly, Manager Asset Strategy Russell Bond, 3 Waters Programme Manager Anze Lencek, Water Quality Lead

4.1 Purpose of Report

To inform the Council on:

- The status of Napier Water Supply (NAP001) at the end of second quarter (Q2) of 2020-2021 compliance year.

- Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for NZ 2005 (Revised 2018) and duties under Health Act 1956 (for period 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020).

At the Meeting

The Council Officers spoke to the report and in response to questions it was noted:

· Once the secure bore status is removed Council will not comply with the protozoa regulations. Officers are looking at options to provide treatment and security at the bores. They are also looking at options to remove the manganese from source water which will assist in resolving water clarity issues. This work shouldn’t cause a significant change in the budget but this is being looked at through the Long Term Plan process.

· Due to the tight compliance timeframe imposed for the installation of UV filters,

It is understood that the water industry will be having further discussions about the implications of the change in requirements on water suppliers. It is possible that the new requirements will be unachievable for most water suppliers without significant investment in infrastructure.

· Council officers are looking for a location in Taradale for a new bore field where any investment in treatment is not going to become redundant.

· Residual disinfectant in the network is still mandatory even with the addition of UV treatment and filters. After 1 July 2021 when the Water Services Act and Exposure Drafts come into force it is possible to apply to Taumata Arowai to go Chlorine free.

· There is a dedicated water-take station project underway which will cover the protection requirements for water for commercial users

ACTION: To have the water-take station project on the list of projects at the next Committee meeting.

Committee's recommendation

Councillor Simpson / Mayor Wise

The Sustainable Napier Committee:

a. Recommend Council endorse:

i. The Report on Napier Water Supply Status end of Q2 2020-2021.

ii. The Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for NZ 2005 (Revised 2018) and duties under Health Act 1956 (for period 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020).

Carried

Councillors McGrath, Simpson, and Tapine left the meeting 11.48am

Councillors McGrath, Simpson, and Tapine returned to the meeting 11.50am

Councillor Mawson / Mayor Wise

Meeting adjourned at 12.11pm

Carried

Councillor Simpson / Brown

Meeting reconvened at 12.39pm

Carried

5. To provide Council with information on Capital Programme Delivery.

Type of Report:	Information
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	1283770
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	James Mear, Manager Design and Projects

5.1 Purpose of Report

To provide Council with information on Capital Programme Delivery.

At the Meeting

In response to questions it was noted:

· There are many more projects in the Project Management Framework which are not shown in the report presented to the Committee. It is possible to provide a summary report of all Council projects at the next Committee meeting.

· The projects that have been included in the report to Committee are high priority, high value, or high risk projects.

· In the Infrastructure Reporting Status Summary if a projects status says it is deferred and with sponsor that is because the project is currently with an external activity manager for action.

· The Marewa Shops Improvements project is on hold due to the latest estimates for work being higher than the available budget. Council Officers are working on a solution to this currently.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Simpson / Crown

The Sustainable Napier Committee:

a. Note that this report is for information purposes only.

Carried

Present	Mayor Wise, Councillor Price (In the Chair), Deputy Mayor Brosnan, Councillors Boag, Browne, Chrystal, Crown, Mawson, McGrath, Simpson, Tapine and Wright
In Attendance	Chief Executive (Dr Stephanie Rotorangi), Director Corporate Services (Adele Henderson), Director Community Services (Antoinette Campbell), Director Infrastructure Services (Jon Kingsford), Director City Strategy (Richard Munneke), Manager Communications and Marketing (Craig Ogborn), Acting Pou Whakarae (Mōrehu Te Tomo), Manager Asset Strategy (Debra Stewart). Building Asset Management Lead (Andrew Clibborn), HBLASS Programme Manager (Toni Goodlass), Manager Environmental Solutions (Cameron Burton), Environmental Management Officer (Hannah Ludlow), 3 Waters Programme Manager (Russell Bond), Water Quality Lead (Anze Lencek), Manager Design and Projects (James Mear), Team Leader Policy Planning (Dean Moriarity), Economic Development Manager (Bill Roberts), and Manager Community Strategies (Natasha Mackie)
Administration	Governance Team

General subject of each matter to be considered.	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter.	Ground(s) under section 48(1) to the passing of this resolution.
1. Council Projects Fund - Application	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.