Appendix One
Extraordinary Meeting of Council
Open Minutes
|
Meeting Date: |
Thursday 7 May 2020 |
|
Time: |
10.06am – 11.26am |
|
Venue |
Via Zoom and livestreamed on Council's Facebook page |
|
Present |
Mayor Wise, Deputy Mayor Brosnan, Councillors Boag, Browne, Chrystal, Crown, Mawson, McGrath, Price, Simpson, Tapine, Taylor, Wright |
|
In Attendance |
Interim Chief Executive, Director Corporate Services, Director Community Services, Director City Services, Director City Strategy, Manager Communications and Marketing Manager Asset Strategy Manager Regulatory Solutions Policy Planner Team Leader 3 Waters 3 Waters Programme Manager Manager business Transformation and Excellence |
|
Administration |
Governance Team |
Apologies
Nil
Conflicts of interest
Nil
Public forum
Nil
Announcements by the Mayor
Welcome was extended to the recently appointed Interim Chief Executive, Keith Marshall.
Neil Taylor, who has been Acting Chief Executive, was thanked for his excellent service over the last eight weeks during the challenging demands of the COVID-19 national response.
Minor matters raised
Nil
Announcements by the management
Nil
Extraordinary Meeting of Council - 07 May 2020 - Open Minutes
1. Water Master Planning
|
Type of Report: |
Operational and Procedural |
|
Legal Reference: |
Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Act 2007 |
|
Document ID: |
912288 |
|
Reporting Officer/s & Unit: |
Russell Bond, 3 Waters Programme Manager |
1.1 Purpose of Report
To introduce the Water Master Plan to Council and to identify critical projects that are needing to be programmed and delivered in the 2020/21 Annual Plan.
|
At the meeting The Manager Asset Strategy spoke to the report noting that the Water Masterplan takes a 30 year view, and is intended to allow for growth while continuing to provide a safe network for the community. A presentation was provided during this item, which can be seen at Appendix One. In response to questions from councillors it was clarified that: · The Tamatea pilot can progress separate from any work on the bores. The time frame for the pilot is expected to be approximately four to six months once the modelling has been received. · Addressing dirty water is a top priority for the team. The work leading to new bore fields will be able to be started again slowly as the COVID-19 alert levels drop; the test bores will be re-initiated, and as the tender information is already prepared it is anticipated that the bore field work will be well progressed by late next year. · A lot of data is held on the bores in the vicinity of A1, and while there is still a small risk that manganese is higher than anticipated in certain areas, confidence is high that the data will allow the manganese levels to be predicted with relative certainty. · Council is moving towards what is a logical way to manage the network whether the system is chlorine-free or not. The updates are also intended to address matters such as pressure and flow. Some adjustments in the smaller branched network may be required should a chlorine-free system proceed but the larger infrastructure would be the same. · The work to date has been focussed on the network rather than on source water; when the multi-focus review was undertaken a variety of experts were included. · Water use will be tracked across large zones, not from a per household metering perspective. · The cost of the pipeline is estimated about $5.5M; most of the cost is related to the work (i.e. trenching etc.) rather than the materials, so preference is to future proof with larger pipe size. · Consideration has been given as to whether the changes to consenting in response to COVID-19 will have any implications for this work, but it is believed that the short time frame to produce the supporting documentation would not fit with Council’s time frames. · As the country moves into recovery from the COVID-19 response, Council will be packaging different pieces of work together to ensure the best value for money is gained for all projects. How the works are combined and what is in included in each ‘package’ will impact on whether quotes are sought from the Depot. · The treatment station does need to be in place before any new bore could be used. This work will also trigger the requirement to implement the new Water Safety plan requirements. · About a six week delay has been experienced in the chlorine-free review from the COVID-19 response; the team will be working hard to bring this time frame as close to the original as possible again. · In the content of potable water, “discharging” into an area means to supply water into an area. · There will be much greater emphasis on managing water demand under the recently notified TANK plan. There are very high water users in Napier and this will need to be reduced, through conservation efforts and active leak management. · By “zoning off” the Tamatea area Council will be able to better address the dirty water issues as the number of bores supplying water will be reduced and greater overall control of the supply conditions will be possible (for example pressure and flow issues). A number of options will also be explored to reduce existing manganese load. · The District Metered Areas will have meters to provide data on incoming and outgoing flows; Council’s SCADA system will also be upgraded. This is within existing budgets. · The potential impacts of the central government three waters review are as yet unknown, but it is highly likely to result in a new regulator and much greater expectations being placed on water managers. Indications to date suggest that chlorine may become mandatory. The Masterplan is moving Napier into a space where it better placed to meet the higher monitoring, reporting and conservation requirements that are anticipated as likely from the review. · There are always some low risks of contamination in any water supply. Where risks are identified for Napier, these are actively reviewed and action taken as it can be, for example one bore head has been closed as it was identified as being quite close to a wastewater main. · Council will be kept up to date as the works are further progressed and ensuing decisions are required.
|
|
|
Council resolution |
That Council: a. Receive the report. b. Approve the approach to developing Borefield #1 in advance of the Global Resource Consent application, with the aim to provide low manganese source water as soon as practical. c. Accept that this approach has potential financial risks with the installation of the larger pipeline that connects the proposed bore to the existing network. |
2. Review of Napier City Mobile Sign Bylaw
|
Type of Report: |
Operational and Procedural |
|
Legal Reference: |
Local Government Act 2002 |
|
Document ID: |
918631 |
|
Reporting Officer/s & Unit: |
Yvonne Legarth, Policy Planner Rachael Horton, Manager Regulatory Solutions |
2.1 Purpose of Report
To seek Council approval of the unamended Mobile Sign Bylaw and to commence consultation pursuant to the Local Government Act sections 82 and 82A, and legal advice.
|
At the meeting The Policy Planner spoke to the report, noting that the intention of the bylaw is to manage public safety and amenity issues relating to the mobile signs. A review has been undertaken and it is recommended that no changes be made to the 2013 Bylaw. Bylaw may be integrated with others in the future in a more ‘omnibus’ Bylaw regarding urban environment. In response to questions from councillors it was clarified that: · The Bylaw relates to signage on trailers. · There have been no complaints under this Bylaw in the last two years and nothing on file prior to that. · An urban environment Bylaw is posited with the intention of increasing consistency across Bylaws that manage the urban environment. They will be able to interact better with the District Plan in this way also. · This Bylaw will speak to some expectations on certain types of election signage but the primary source of rules for election signage is the District Plan.
|
|
Council resolution |
That Council: a. Confirm, in accordance with Section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, that a Mobile Sign Bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the problems that mobile signs can have on: i. public and traffic safety ii. maintenance of aesthetic standards iii. control of offensive material on mobile signs b. Confirm that the Mobile Sign Bylaw is currently the most appropriate form of bylaw. c. Agree that the Mobile Sign Bylaw is not inconsistent with, or have any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. d. Adopt the reviewed and unamended Napier City Council Mobile Sign Bylaw for consultation. e. Confirm that a further review of the Mobile Sign Bylaw 2013 will be undertaken as part of the process to include the Mobile Sign Bylaw in the yet to be prepared consolidated Napier City Council Urban Environment Bylaw. f. Authorise Officers to consult in accordance with the principles in LGA ss 82 and 82A in a manner that is consistent with legal advice.
|
The meeting closed at 11.26am
|
Approved and adopted as a true and accurate record of the meeting.
Chairperson .............................................................................................................................
Date of approval ...................................................................................................................... |
Appendix One