Agenda of Regulatory Committee

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Regulatory Committee will be held on:

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Thursday, 6 July 2017

9.30am

Room 1, Level 26
135 Albert Street
Auckland

Regulatory Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Cr Linda Cooper, JP
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Wayne Walker
Members	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins
	Cr Richard Hills
	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	IMSB Chair David Taipari
	Cr John Watson
	IMSB Member Glenn Wilcox

Ex-officio	Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP
	Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore

(Quorum 5 members)

Maryke Fouche

Governance Advisor

28 June 2017

Contact Telephone: (09 8902591)

Email: maryke.fouche@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

TERMS OF REFERENCE

Responsibilities

The committee is responsible for regulatory hearings (required by relevant legislation) on behalf of the council. The committee is responsible for appointing independent commissioners to carry out the council’s functions or delegating the appointment power (as set out in the committee’s policy). The committee is responsible for regulatory policy and bylaws. Where the committee’s powers are recommendatory, the committee or the appointee will provide recommendations to the relevant decision-maker.

The committee’s key responsibilities include:

· decision-making (including through a hearings process) under the Resource Management Act 1991 and related legislation

· hearing and determining objections under the Dog Control Act 1996

· decision-making under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

· hearing and determining matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002 (this cannot be sub-delegated)

· hearing and determining matters arising under bylaws

· receiving recommendations from officers and appointing independent hearings commissioners to a pool of commissioners who will be available to make decisions on matters as directed by the Regulatory Committee

· receiving recommendations from officers and deciding who should make a decision on any particular matter including who should sit as hearings commissioners in any particular hearing

· monitoring the performance of regulatory decision-making

· where decisions are appealed or where the committee decides that the council itself should appeal a decision, directing the conduct of any such appeals

· considering and making recommendations to the Governing Body regarding the regulatory and bylaw delegations (including to Local Boards)

· regulatory fees and charges

· recommend bylaws to Governing Body for consultation and adoption

· appointing hearings panels for bylaw matters

· review local board and Auckland water organisation proposed bylaws and recommend to Governing Body

· set regulatory policy and controls, including performing the delegations made by the Governing Body to the former Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, under resolution GB/2012/157 in relation to dogs and GB/2014/121 in relation to alcohol.

· engage with local boards on bylaw development and review

· adopting or amending a policy or policies and making any necessary sub-delegations relating to any of the above areas of responsibility to provide guidance and transparency to those involved.

Not all decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 and other enactments require a hearing to be held and the term “decision-making” is used to encompass a range of decision-making processes including through a hearing. “Decision-making” includes, but is not limited to, decisions in relation to applications for resource consent, plan changes, notices of requirement, objections, existing use right certificates and certificates of compliance and also includes all necessary related decision-making.

In adopting a policy or policies and making any sub-delegations, the committee must ensure that it retains oversight of decision-making under the Resource Management Act 1991 and that it provides for councillors to be involved in decision-making in appropriate circumstances.

For the avoidance of doubt, these delegations confirm the existing delegations (contained in the chief executive’s Delegations Register) to hearings commissioners and staff relating to decision-making under the RMA and other enactments mentioned below but limits those delegations by requiring them to be exercised as directed by the Regulatory Committee.

Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

All Bylaws

Biosecurity Act 1993
Building Act 2004
Dog Control Act 1996
Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987
Gambling Act 2003;Land Transport Act 1998

Health Act 1956
Local Government Act 1974
Local Government Act 2002
Local Government (Auckland Council Act) 2009
Resource Management Act 1991
Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Waste Minimisation Act 2008

Maritime Transport Act 1994
Related Regulations

Powers

(i) All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities.

Except:

(a) powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2)

(b) where the committee’s responsibility is limited to making a recommendation only.

(ii) Power to establish subcommittees.

Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

Members of the public

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

Those who are not members of the public

General principles

· Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

· Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

· Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

· In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

Members of the meeting

· The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

· However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

· All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

Independent Māori Statutory Board

· Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

· Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

Staff

· All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

· Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

Local Board members

· Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain. This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

Council Controlled Organisations

· Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

Regulatory Committee

06 July 2017

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Apologies 9

2 Declaration of Interest 9

3 Confirmation of Minutes 9

4 Petitions 9

5 Public Input 9

6 Local Board Input 9

7 Extraordinary Business 9

8 Notices of Motion 10

9 Determination of an Objection to the construction of the Private Stormwater line and a Wastewater Connection at 102C Mellons Bay Road, to service 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay. 11

10 Determination of an Objection to the construction of a Stormwater Overland Flow Path Channel through 1 Takanini School Road, to service Addison Developments, Takanini. 37

11 Regulatory Fees FY18 63

12 Regulatory Committee Summary of Information Items - 6 July 2017 67

13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

14 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 73

C1 Deliberations on an objection to the construction of the Private Stormwater line and a Wastewater Connection at 102C Mellons Bay Road, to service 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay. 73

C2 Deliberations on an Objection to the construction of a Stormwater Overland Flow Path Channel through 1 Takanini School Road, to service Addison Developments, Takanini. 73

1 Apologies

Apologies from Mayor P Goff, Deputy Mayor B Cashmore, Cr E Collins, and Cr R Hills have been received.

2 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

3 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Regulatory Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 15 June 2017, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

5 Public Input

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

At the close of the agenda no requests for public input had been received.

6 Local Board Input

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

7 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

8 Notices of Motion

There were no notices of motion.

Regulatory Committee

06 July 2017

Determination of an Objection to the construction of the Private Stormwater line and a Wastewater Connection at 102C Mellons Bay Road, to service 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay.

File No.: CP2017/12122

Purpose

1. To hear and determine an objection to private stormwater and wastewater line connections under section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974.

Executive summary

2. This report accompanies the hearing of an objection pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act, 1974 (“the Act”). The proposed development (Lot 2) at 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay does not have a stormwater and wastewater connection to the council’s network.

3. The property owner is seeking to service his property by:

· connecting to an existing wastewater manhole, approximately one metre in from the common boundary of the neighbouring property at 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay, and

· thrusting a new public stormwater pipeline across 102C Mellons Bay Road to connect to an existing manhole in the access way of 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road.

4. The applicant and the council consider these to be the only practical route. The applicant endeavoured, however was unable, to obtain consents from the neighbours and the council has since served Notice under the Act on the neighbours to enable the work to be carried out.

5. Following the service of Notice under the Act and the council facilitated negotiations, conditional consent has been provided by the owners of 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road. These conditions have been accepted by the applicant.

6. Yu Wang and Jing Han, owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay have however advised in writing that they object and continue to object to the proposed works. The council’s offer for facilitated negotiations between themselves and the applicant were declined. Section 460 of the Act provides a right to be heard by a committee of the council. Delegation to undertake the hearing of the objection lies with the Regulatory Committee.

7. The Regulatory Committee must hear the objection and determine whether or not to endorse the works.

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a) hear and determine the objection by the owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay pursuant to section 460 and Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1974, and

b) endorse the proposed wastewater connection and the construction of the stormwater pipeline through the neighbouring land at 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay as the only practical option, pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974 and as referenced on approved plans under Resource Consent No. 45403 dated 3^rd November 2014.

Comments

Background

8. In November 2014, the council approved resource consent for the proposed subdivision and development at 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay. This requires the proposed lot 2 to;

· connect to an existing wastewater manhole, approximately one metre in from the common boundary of the neighbouring property, 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay and

· construction of a new public stormwater pipeline by thrusting across 102C Mellons Bay Road to connect to an existing manhole in the access way of 104 and 104 Mellons Bay Road.

9. A new dwelling on proposed lot 2 is now nearing completion. Plans of the subdivision and development, proposed public stormwater and wastewater lines and connections and long sections are provided as Attachment A.

10. Mr Ian Gibson (Airey Consultants Ltd), agent for Mr Andrius Mitalauskas (owner) has endeavoured but failed to negotiate access to 102C Mellons Bay Road to install a 180mm diameter public stormwater pipeline and secondly to connect to the existing wastewater manhole within their property. Consequently, Mr Andrius Mitalauskas has requested that the council exercise its powers under the Act to enable the works to be carried out.

11. The affected property owners are as follows:

102C Mellons Bay Road – Yu Wang & Jing Han

104 Mellons Bay Road – Henry Kwok & Eunicia Tan

104A Mellons Bay Road – Cristina Marie Della Barnes and Christopher George Barnes

12. The following table summarises the activities and outcomes of negotiations undertaken to date.

13. Table 1: Summary of activities and negotiations.

21/10/2015	Douglas Mitchell – Senior Development Engineer, Auckland Council wrote to affected property owners (102C, 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road) regarding the development and sought meeting to discuss their concerns, etc.
November 2015	Objection received from 104 Mellons Bay Road, whilst discussions were held with other property owners.
6/05/2016	Veer Khar – Team Leader - Development Engineering, Auckland Council serves a ‘NOTICE ON INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT A DRAIN ON PRIVATE LAND, LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT – SECTION 460’ to the three affected property owners.
May 2016	Objections received from 102C & 104 Mellons Bay Road, discussions were held and settlement not reached.
March 2017	TERRA Consultants engaged by Auckland Council to facilitate negotiations with affected property owners.
April 2017	TERRA Consultants (Viren Sharma) engage in discussions with the affected property owners. This included an introduction, explanation of the council’s role and s460 process, request for a meeting to discuss specific concerns, etc. Key message: Auckland Council keen to facilitate negotiations between parties to amicably resolve the matter.
Early May 2017	Successfully facilitated negotiations and conditional consent received from 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road. These conditions were reviewed & accepted by the applicant.
	Meeting and Concerns raised by 102C Mellons Bay Road
20/04/2017	Viren Sharma & George (mandarin translator) from TERRA Consultants meet with the owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road to hear their specific concerns. These were as follows: 1. Re-iterated their strong objection regarding the proposed development & associated ‘right of entry’ on their property as per the approved plans. 2. Sought explanation as to why the option of constructing the proposed stormwater pipeline within the right of way/ access way of 104 & 104A Mellons Bay Road was not considered or approved. 3. Were still very unhappy regarding the manner in which the applicant had previously approached them to sign-off the consent form. 4. Also, objection based on ‘Feng Shui’ beliefs i.e. the resulting negative energies associated with construction of the pipeline and other properties’ waste going through their property which would affect their health and wealth.
26/04/2017	Minutes of meeting emailed to 102C Mellons Bay Road and feedback emailed to the applicant’s agent ‘Airey Consultants’.
01/05/2017	Received text message from 102C Mellons Bay Road, declining any further discussions regarding the matter and the objection to be noted.
02/05/2017	Replied to text message, encouraging property owners to meet/ continue dialogue and seek a resolution to address concerns.
03/05/2017	Received a further text message from owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road. I quote ‘…I have no time to talk this topic again. If necessary, I will use legal means to solve the problem.’
09/05/2017	Emailed the property owner, acknowledging their text messages i.e. declining to discuss or negotiate their concerns with the applicant. Also, outlined actions going forward, including: · the available option of not meeting the applicant to progress further discussions i.e. Auckland Council to facilitate discussions · or the matter being referred to the Hearing Committee for decision.
09/05/2017	Compensation Offer: after the above email, received a compensation offer of $3,000 from the applicant to reach settlement. This offer was emailed to the owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road.
17/05/2017	Followed up with an email, sought feedback regarding the earlier email & the offer. No response received from 102C Mellons Bay Road.
22/05/2017	Applicant requests the council to proceed to a hearing.

14. Negotiations with the owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road has proved to be difficult and without success.as the family have strong beliefs in ‘Feng Shui’. They have strong objections to the development and have indicated that if required, would use legal means to challenge the council’s decision.

15. The key objections noted in the objection email from owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road dated 25^th May 2016 included:

a. The construction of the proposed stormwater pipeline across their property will limit the future development opportunities and impact the value of their property.

b. A lack of adequate consultation by the applicant with the neighbours prior to the start of construction of the development.

c. The potential risk to their property in the event of any broken pipes, etc.

d. As a result of the proposed subdivision, increased number of properties using the ‘Right of Way’ causing ‘traffic jam’ & inconvenience to other properties.

16. Copy of the objection is contained as Attachment B.

17. At the meeting held at 102C Mellons Bay Road on 20 April 2017, the owners re-iterated their strong objection regarding the proposal. These are as set out in the table above and include as the second point;

2. “Sought explanation as to why the option of constructing the proposed stormwater pipeline within the right of way/ access way of 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road was not considered or approved”.

18. In the minutes of this meeting (26/04/2017), the council clarified their position regarding this second point in that:

· “Council infrastructure rules require the most practical, shortest and most direct route for all proposed public infrastructure/ pipelines. This is reflected in the approved plans.”

19. No further response has been received in response to the request for further dialogue or the $3,000 compensation offer to settle and obtain the necessary consent.

Discussion

20. The owner of 102A Mellons Bay Road have met the requirements of the Local Government Act with regards to using the powers of section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974. Mr Ian Gibson (Airey Consultants Ltd), agent for Mr Andrius Mitalauskas (owner) has sought to negotiate access to the neighbouring property to undertake drainage works and has investigated alternative solutions.

21. The council considers that the proposed wastewater connection would adequately service 102A Mellons Bay Road. The existing public wastewater line has adequate capacity and the manhole is approximately one metre in from the common boundary of the neighbouring property: 102C Mellons Bay Road.

22. The proposal to construct a new public stormwater pipeline by thrusting across 102C Mellons Bay Road and connecting to an existing manhole in the access way of 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road is the most practical, shortest and most direct route for the pipeline. In addition, the alignment of this proposed stormwater pipeline within 102C Mellons Bay Road is located close to the North-western boundary (between the boundary fence & the deck), to minimise any constraints for future development if the existing deck is demolished to make way for a new structure.

23. An alternative route to construct the stormwater pipeline within the right of way/ access way of 104 and 104A Mellons Bay Road, is considered inappropriate as this option would require additional manholes due to the various change in gradients and change in direction; also would require additional lengths of pipe due to a longer route resulting in an increased construction and future maintenance costs.

24. Finally, the proposed construction methodology i.e. thrusting across 102C Mellons Bay Road would not disturb any areas within the property.

25. The owner of 102A Mellons Bay Road will be required to build the works in accordance with the approved engineering works approval.

Consideration

26. Within the framework of the Regulatory Committee’s Terms of Reference from the Governing Body, the Regulatory Committee has the responsibility for “Hearing and determining the matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002. This delegation cannot be sub delegated”.

27. At the hearing, both the applicant and the objector can present their evidence in support of their positions. After hearing all the evidence and the relevant information, the Hearings Committee then has to make a decision. There is no right of appeal of the decision of the Regulatory Committee.

Local board views and implications

28. The Local Board is not advised of service connection request under the Act. Further the determination of this objection requires no consultation beyond the owners of 102C Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay.

Māori impact statement

29. Under Section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974, Iwi are not considered a relevant affected party unless they are land owners through which a proposed drain is to be constructed.

Implementation

30. The costs of this process and committee hearing are met by the owner of 102A Mellons Bay Road.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Plans of subdivision and development, proposed public stormwater and wastewater lines and long sections	17
b ⇩	Copy of the Objection, Notice and Section 460 LGA	31

Signatories

Author	Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager
Authoriser	Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services

Regulatory Committee

06 July 2017

Determination of an Objection to the construction of a Stormwater Overland Flow Path Channel through 1 Takanini School Road, to service Addison Developments, Takanini.

File No.: CP2017/12795

Purpose

1. To hear and determine an objection to the construction of a stormwater overland flow path channel under section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974.

Executive summary

2. This report accompanies the hearing of an objection pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act, 1974 (“the Act”). Servicing the development of ‘Addison Balance Land’ for Addison Developments Ltd, requires the construction of an overland flow path through 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini and the adjacent rail corridor.

3. The applicant and the council consider this to be the only practical route. The applicant endeavoured, however was unable to obtain consent from the ‘The Sabatier Family Trust’, the owners of 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini. The council has since served Notice under the Act on the property owner to enable the work to be carried out.

4. The Sabatier Family Trust objected to the notice and settlement of the objection by an Auckland Council appointed mediator has not been successful.

5. Section 460 of the Act provides a right to be heard by a committee of the council. Delegation to undertake the hearing of the objection lies with the Regulatory Committee. The Regulatory Committee must hear the objection and determine whether or not to endorse the works.

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a) hear and determine the objection by the owners of 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini pursuant to section 460 and Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 1974, and

b) endorse the construction of an overland flow path channel through Lot 2 DP 157092 at 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini as the only practical option, pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974 and as referenced on approved plans under EPA – 2016 - 642 - Stg 6C dated 15^th February 2017.

Comments

Background

6. Addison Developments Ltd has constructed the required 1 in 10-year capacity primary stormwater drainage system to service the development.

7. In February 2017, Council provided an engineering plan approval for the construction of a stormwater overland flow path channel through Lot 2 DP 157092 at 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini. This channel will convey the flood waters in excess of the network capacity to the Waimana Trunk stormwater pipeline that was constructed by Papakura District Council in 2007 to service the new development catchment area, including 1 Takanini School Road.

8. The plans of the overland flow path across the Addison land and 1 Takanini Road are as shown on drawing 450 date 02/17 from Dodd Civil Consultants, and provided as Attachment A.

9. Addison Developments Ltd has endeavoured but failed to negotiate access to 1 Takanini School Rd, Takanini to construct the required stormwater overland flow path channel. Consequently, they have now requested the council exercise its powers under the Act to enable the works to be carried out.

10. Following the service of Notice under the Act, Jean-Marie Sabatier on behalf of The Sabatier Family Trust advised in writing that they object to the proposed works. Auckland Council staff initially facilitated negotiations and subsequently also appointed an Independent Commissioner to mediate between the parties to reach settlement. These attempts by the council to resolve the matter have been unsuccessful.

Table 1: Summary of activities and negotiations undertaken to date.

September 2016	Supporting information provided by Applicant to demonstrate that negotiations between parties were held, however they failed to reach settlement: Commercial Term Sheet (CTS): an agreement drawn by Addison Developments between themselves and ‘The Sabatier Family Trust’ and considered by the parties to reach an agreement regarding the proposal. An updated CTS issued in response to the negotiations, however the parties failed to reach settlement
December 2016 – March 2017	Douglas Mitchell – Auckland Council’s Senior Development Engineer facilitated a number of negotiations between the parties, however no settlement reached
15/02/2017	Healthy Waters Department of Auckland Council endorses the proposal as the proposed flow path is consistent with the 2010 Pahurehure Catchment Plan
15/02/2017	Engineering Plan Approval provided by the council for the proposal to construct the stormwater overland flow path through Lot 2 DP 157092 at 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini
20/02/2017	Veer Khar – Team Leader - Development Engineering, Auckland Council serves a ‘NOTICE ON INTENTION TO CONSTRUCT A DRAIN ON PRIVATE LAND, LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT – SECTION 460’ to the affected property owner
07/03/2017	Jean-Marie Sabatier on behalf of ‘The Sabatier Family Trust’ submits a request to the council under the Local Information Official Information Act (LGOIMA) to provide all communications relating to the proposed swale on his property, including any other designs/ solutions, etc.
20/03/2017	Objections received from Jean-Marie Sabatier on behalf of ‘The Sabatier Family Trust’ advised in writing that they objected to the proposed works
27/03/2017	Auckland Council appoints David Hill, an Independent Commissioner to mediate between the parties. After initially meeting the parties individually, a joint mediation meeting held on 10^th April 2017 and the parties failed to reach settlement. The negotiations were without prejudice however the facilitator has provided a summary of the discussions to the parties in the knowledge that it would be available at the hearing. This is provided as Attachment C.
17/05/2017	Applicant requests the council to proceed to a hearing.

11. The objections noted in the letter from owners of 1 Takanini School Road dated 20^th March 2017 in summary included:

a. Auckland Council allowing the Addison development to proceed without resolving the issue of overland flow path downstream of the development and through his property

b. In the affected owner’s view, Addison Developments Ltd had not taken reasonable steps in resolving the access issues through his property for drainage requirements

c. Lack of information regarding other drainage options considered by the applicant

d. Failure to pursue other options by the applicant

e. Environmental impact – the efficiency and safety of the proposal requires further investigation

f. Negative/ unfair impact on the Trust’s property

g. Awaiting information requested under LGOIMA.

12. Copy of the objection is contained as Attachment B.

Discussion

13. Addison Developments Ltd have met the expectations of council with regards to using the powers of section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974. They have made a number of unsuccessful attempts to negotiate with The Sabatier family Trust, including the offer of compensation as part of the agreement (refer attached Commercial Term Sheet) to undertake the drainage works.

14. The proposed overland flow path channel is in the lowest point of the generally very flat topography in Takanini, where the overland flows can be conveyed to the Waimana Trunk stormwater pipeline i.e. downstream of the property at 1 Takanini School Road.

15. The applicant and the council consider this to be the only practical route.

16. There has been a number of meetings with the owners of 1 Takanini School Road, including meetings which have been attended by representatives of Healthy Waters Department of the council to state their preference for the approved option (route) and the reasoning. These are detailed in the attached letter from Andrew Chin, Strategy, Resilience & Development Manager, Healthy Waters Department, endorsing the above proposal (Attachment C).

17. The information requested under the Local Information Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) was provided to Jean-Marie Sabatier on 3^rd April 2017. Copy of the cover letter sent by council is provided as Attachment D.

18. Addison Developments Ltd will be required to build the works in accordance with the approved engineering works approval.

Consideration

19. Within the framework of the Regulatory Committee’s Terms of Reference from the Governing Body, the Regulatory Committee has the responsibility for “Hearing and determining the matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002. This delegation cannot be sub delegated”. Copy of Section 460 and Schedule 12 of the Act are provided as Attachment E.

20. At the hearing, both the applicant and the objector can present their evidence in support of their positions. After hearing all the evidence and the relevant information, the Hearings Committee then has to make a decision. There is no right of appeal of the decision of the Regulatory Committee.

Local board views and implications

21. The Local Board is not advised of service connection request under the Act. Further the determination of this objection requires no consultation beyond the owners of 1 Takanini School Road, Takanini.

Māori impact statement

22. Under Section 460 of the Local Government Act 1974, Iwi are not considered a relevant affected party unless they are land owners through which a proposed drain is to be constructed.

Implementation

23. The costs of commissioners are met by the applicant.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Approved engineering plan (EPA -2016-642 -Stg 6C dated 15th February 2017) showing the proposed stormwater overland flow path channel, cross section and long section.	41
b ⇩	Objection letter from Jean-Marie Sabatier on behalf of ‘The Sabatier Family Trust’	49
c ⇩	Independent Mediators report and letter from A. Chin, Strategy, Resilience & Development Manager, Healthy Waters Department.	53
d ⇩	Copy of cover letter sent by council with the information provided under LGOIMA	57
e ⇩	Section 460 of Local Government Act 1974 and Schedule 12 of Local Government Act 2002	61

Signatories

Author	Robert Andrews - Resolutions Team Manager
Authoriser	Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services

Regulatory Committee

06 July 2017

Regulatory Fees FY18

File No.: CP2017/12565

Purpose

1. To seek approval to increase Standard Regulatory hourly rate from $149 to $159 (GST Inclusive)

2. To seek approval to increase Standard Building & Building Warrant of Fitness (BWOF) inspection fee from $144 to $159 (GST Inclusive) to align with hourly rate & recover the cost of inspection.

3. To seek approval to charge $126 (GST Inclusive) for a Swimming Pool inspection.

Executive summary

4. The increase in fees detailed is about recovery of cost increases borne by Regulatory Services to deliver the service.

5. This proposal ensures that the council can continue to provide high quality Regulatory Services and deliver on key housing & environmental outcomes for Auckland.

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a) approve the charging of $159 (GST inclusive) for Standard Regulatory Hourly rate (Building processing & inspections, compliance, monitoring, environmental health) effective 17^th July 2017

b) approve the charging of $159 (GST inclusive) for a Building Inspection & $159 (GST inclusive) for a Building Warrant of Fitness inspection effective 17^th July 2017

c) approve the charging of $126 (GST inclusive) for a swimming pool inspection effective 17^th July 2017.

Comments

6. Staff are seeking approval of these fees as the original fees were adopted by the council via a resolution and the proposed increases are materially greater than the council rate of inflation.

7. The proposed changes in hourly rates reflect the increased cost to council of processing more complex applications requiring greater skill levels and care from the staff involved. This trend is forecast to continue as housing density and project complexity increases.

8. It is proposed to increase the Standard Regulatory Hourly rate (building processing & inspections, compliance, monitoring, environmental health) from $149 (GST inclusive) to $159 (GST inclusive) effective 17^th July 2017 – an increase of 6.7%.

9. It is proposed to increase Standard Building & Building Warrant of Fitness (BWOF) inspection fee from $144 (GST inclusive) to $159 (GST inclusive) effective 17^th July 2017 – an increase of 10.4%.

10. Consent complexity mix is moving from simple to complex at a significant rate of change

a) Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of complex applications over the last 3 years has been 5.9%

b) Complex consents now constitute over 50% of application volume

c) The proposal aligns the inspection fees specified with the Standard hourly rate

· At present an inspection costs $144 for 30 mins & the hourly rate is $149

· The hourly rate is increasing from $149 to $159 to recover cost increases

· The new Inspection rate assumes 15mins of travel time & 15mins of Preparation / Admin time is billed so that the 30 min inspection is actually 1 hour of Inspection resource time which Auckland Council has to fund.

d) Based on 9 inspections per issued consent, this increase will add approximately $135 to the cost of each build – a 0.4% increase in the cost of each build (average $383,000 per consent)

e) The impact of only increasing cost by the standard inflationary figure of 1.5% is a reduction in non-rates revenue of $1.9m which would then be borne by ratepayers.

f) In comparison to other territorial authorities across NZ, Auckland Council is conservatively priced:

· Wellington - $220 / Hour

· Christchurch - $200 / Hour

Proposed Swimming Pool Fees

11. The Building (Pools) Amendment Act 2016 repealed the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 and inserted provisions relating to residential pool safety in the Building Act 2004. This came into effect on 1 January 2017

a) Key changes include:

· Residential swimming pool barriers must be inspected every three years

· Safety covers will be able to be used as barriers for spa pools and hot tubs

· Territorial authorities will have better tools to enforce pool barrier requirements, including notices to fix and infringement notices.

b) At present Building Control is only charging for secondary and subsequent inspections - $144 (GST Inclusive).

· The current charge covers the cost of performing and administering subsequent inspections (approximately 40% of initial pool inspections fail).

· The cost (estimated $1.1m) of compliant initial inspections is currently being borne by the ratepayer.

12. It is proposed to charge $126 (GST Inclusive) for all Swimming Pool Inspections

a) This charge covers the cost of performing a single Swimming Pool inspection based on the completion of approximately 17,000 Swimming Pool inspections

b) The proposed fee has a marginal impact ($0.11/day over 3 years) on Ratepayers with a Swimming or Spa pool.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13. The impact on compliance cost is marginal and will not impact on achievement of key Local Board objectives.

Māori impact statement

14. As with the general population of Tāmaki Makaurau, the proposed measures will have an impact on Māori because there will be a marginal increase in building compliance costs across the board.

15. There is assistance available through the council to recover regulatory costs on Māori land for papakāinga development. This is through the Cultural Initiatives Fund.

Implementation

16. If approved the increased fees would become effective on the 17^th of July 2017.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Author

Bryn Edwards - Business & Finance Manager

Authorisers

Ian McCormick - Manager Building Control

Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services

Regulatory Committee

06 July 2017

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

That the Regulatory Committee:

a) exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject 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(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

C1 Deliberations on an objection to the construction of the Private Stormwater line and a Wastewater Connection at 102C Mellons Bay Road, to service 102A Mellons Bay Road, Mellons Bay.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains information that could compromise the council in undertaking without prejudice negotiations of this objection pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

C2 Deliberations on an Objection to the construction of a Stormwater Overland Flow Path Channel through 1 Takanini School Road, to service Addison Developments, Takanini.

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

In particular, the report contains information that could compromise the council in undertaking without prejudice negotiations of this objection pursuant to section 460 of the Local Government Act.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

Author	Maryke Fouche – Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services