I hereby give notice that an ordinary
meeting of the Regulatory Committee will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Tuesday, 5
July 2022
10.00am
Reception
Lounge,
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland
|
|
Komiti Whakahaere ā-Ture /
Regulatory Committee
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Cr Linda Cooper, JP
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Cr Josephine Bartley
|
|
|
Members
|
Cr Dr Cathy Casey
|
|
|
|
Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore
|
|
|
|
Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins
|
|
|
|
Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP
|
|
|
|
Cr Shane Henderson
|
|
|
|
Cr Daniel Newman, JP
|
|
|
|
Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
|
|
|
|
IMSB Chair David Taipari
|
|
|
|
IMSB Member Glenn Wilcox
|
|
|
|
Cr Paul Young
|
|
(Quorum 5 members)
|
|
|
Sophie White
Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere /
Governance Advisor
29 June 2022
Contact Telephone: 021836328
Email: sophie.r.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
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
·
appointing independent hearings commissioners to a pool of
commissioners who will be available to make decisions on matters as directed by
the Regulatory Committee
·
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)
·
recommending bylaws to the Governing Body for consultation and
adoption
·
reviewing local board and Auckland water organisation proposed
bylaws and making recommendations to the Governing Body
·
appointing panels to hear and deliberate on public feedback
related to regulatory policy and bylaw matters
·
deciding regulatory policies that are not otherwise the
responsibility of another committee
·
deciding regulatory policies, standards and controls associated
with bylaws including those delegated to the former Regulatory and Bylaws
Committee, under resolution GB/2012/157 (dogs) and GB/2014/121 (alcohol)
·
receiving local board feedback on bylaw and regulatory policy
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, certificates of compliance, regulatory policy and
bylaws 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 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
Health Act 1956
Land Transport Act 1998
Local Government Act 1974
Local Government Act 2002
Local Government (Auckland Council Act) 2009
Maritime Transport Act 1994
Psychoactive Substances Act 2013
Resource Management Act 1991
Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Waste Minimisation Act 2008
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.
Code of conduct
For information relating to Auckland
Council’s elected members code of conduct, please refer to this link on
the Auckland Council website - https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/elected-members-remuneration-declarations-interest/Pages/elected-members-code-conduct.aspx
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
05 July 2022
|
|
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 10
8 Resource
Consents Appeals: Status Report 5 July 2022 11
9 Summary
of Confidential Decisions and related information released into Open 29
10 Summary
of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 5 July
2022 37
11 Objection
to Nuisance Abatement Notice by Susan Nerney 49
12 Consideration
of Extraordinary Items
At the close of
the agenda no apologies had 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 Tuesday, 14 June 2022, 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.”
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
Resource
Consents Appeals: Status Report 5 July 2022
File No.: CP2022/09074
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
provide an update of all current resource consent appeals lodged with the
Environment Court.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This
memorandum provides a summary of current resource consent appeals to which the
Auckland Council is a party. It updates the report to the Regulatory Committee
on 22 April 2022.
3. If
committee members have detailed questions concerning specific appeals, it would
be helpful if they could raise them prior to the meeting with Robert Andrews
(phone: 09 353-9254) or email: robert.andrews@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz) in the
first instance.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) receive
the Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 5 July 2022
Horopaki
Context
4. As
at 20 June 2022, there are 30 resource consent appeals to which Auckland
Council is a party. These are grouped by Local Board Area geographically from
north to south, as set out in Attachment A. Changes since the last
report and new appeals received are shown in bold italic text.
5. The
principal specialist planners - resource consents, continue to resolve these
appeals expeditiously. In the period since preparing the previous status report
on 22 April 2022, there has been one new appeal lodged and two resolved.
6. The
appeal by McCallum Bros Ltd is to a decision by council’s independent
commissioners to refuse applications to extract up to 2,000,000m³ of sand
from between a 25m to 40m depth over an approximate area of 44 km² from
the coastal marine area (CMA) offshore at Pakiri. The applicant seeks renewal
of an existing 2003, 20-year consent on similar terms, essentially in the same
area using a trailer suction dredge. The proposed sand
extraction area is zoned General Coastal Marine Zone in the Auckland Coastal
Plan as contained in the Auckland Unitary Plan – Operative in Part.
The consents sought are Discretionary, being coastal consents for the sand
extraction and disturbance of the CMA for sampling and monitoring the
extraction effects, and a discharge consent for the discharge of excess
seawater and fine sediments.
7. In
refusing consent the commissioners were not satisfied with the level of
information provided on coastal processes and found that the adverse effects on
cultural values and Mana Whenua interests will be more than minor. A
large number of submitters, primarily from iwi groups have since become Section
274 parties to the appeal.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
8. To receive the
report as provided.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
9. The report provides
an update of consent appeals and seeks no resolution or consideration of the
merits associated with them.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
10. Not
applicable.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
11. Not
applicable.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
12. The decision requested of the
Regulatory Committee is to receive this progress report rather than to consider
the relevance to Māori associated with each of the appeals at this time.
13. The
Resource Management Act 1991 includes a number of matters under Part 2, which
relate to the relationship of Tangata Whenua to the management of air, land and
water resources. Maori values associated with the land, air and
freshwater bodies of the Auckland Region are based on whakapapa and stem from
the long social, economic and cultural associations and experiences with such
taonga. These matters where relevant are considered with the resolution of the
resource consent appeals.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
14. Environment Court appeal
hearings can generate significant costs in terms of commissioning legal counsel
and expert witnesses. Informal mediation and negotiation processes seek to
limit these costs. Although it can have budget implications, it is
important that Auckland Council, when necessary, ensure that resource consents
maintain appropriate environmental outcomes and remain consistent with the statutory
plan policy framework through the appeal process.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
15. Not
applicable.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
16. Not
applicable.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Resource Consent Appeals as at 21 June 2022
|
15
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Robert Andrews - Principal Specialist Planning
|
|
Authorisers
|
Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents
Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
Summary of Confidential Decisions and
related information released into Open
File No.: CP2022/09329
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
note confidential decisions and related information released into the public
domain.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This
is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility
of confidential decisions made that can now be released into the public domain.
3. The
following decisions/documents are now publicly available:
|
Date of
Decision
|
Subject
|
|
14/06/22
|
Regulatory
Committee
Appointment
of Panel member to the National Policy Statement - Urban Development plan
change Independent Hearing Panel
|
4. Note
that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer
questions about the items referred to in this summary. Regulatory
Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) note
the confidential decision and related information that is now publicly
available:
i) Appointment of Panel member to the National Policy Statement -
Urban Development plan change Independent Hearing Panel
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Appointment of Panel member to the National Report -
Policy Statement - Urban Development plan change Independent Hearing Panel
|
31
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Sophie White - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere /
Governance Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
Summary of Regulatory Committee
Information - updates, memos and briefings - 5 July 2022
File No.: CP2022/09115
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To note the progress on the forward work programme appended as
Attachment A.
2. To receive a summary and provide a public record of
workshops, memoranda or briefing papers that may have been held or been
distributed to Regulatory Committee members.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
3. This
is a regular information-only report which aims to provide public visibility of
information circulated to committee members via memo or other means, where no
decisions are required.
4. These
documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:
http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/
o at the top left of the
page, select meeting/Te hui “Regulatory Committee” from the drop-down
tab and click “View”;
o under
‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the
document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.
5. Note
that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer
questions about the items referred to in this summary. Committee
members should direct any questions to the authors.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) note
the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A of the
agenda report.
b) receive
the summary of Regulatory Committee report 5 July 2022.
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Regulatory Committee Forward Work Programme - 5 July
2022
|
39
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Sophie White - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere /
Governance Advisor
|
|
Authoriser
|
Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Kōmiti Whakahaere ā-Ture / Regulatory Committee
Forward Work Programme 2022
This committee deals with regulatory
hearings, appointing independent commissioners and for the development of
regulatory policy and bylaws.
The full terms of reference can be found
here.
|
|
Area of work and Lead Department
|
Reason for work
|
Committee role
(decision and/or direction)
|
Expected timeframes
Highlight the month(s) this is expected
to come to committee in 2022
|
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
Alcohol Licensing
Licensing & Regulatory Compliance
|
Report on the revenue
received and the costs incurred for the alcohol licensing process –
required by regulation 19 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees)
Regulations 2013.
|
Note that the majority of alcohol licensing costs were
recovered from the existing default licensing fees regime for the twelve
months to 30 June
Confirm continuance of the default licensing fees regime
Review the default licensing fees regime after a suitable
period of time has elapsed following the implementation of the Local Alcohol
Policy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Animal Management
Licensing & Regulatory Compliance
|
Report on Animal Management
activities for the year ending August/Sept 2021as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996
|
Note: that the Animal
Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act
1996 and staff will provide the 2020/2021 report to the Secretary of Local
Government
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Objection hearings under
section 181 of the Local Government Act
|
The
committee hears and determines objections to proposed stormwater works on
private properties pursuant to section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002
|
Decision on whether the council can proceed
with works on the public stormwater network on private land.
Hearings will be undertaken by the committee as the
need arises.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resource Consents Appeal
Update
Resource Consents
|
To
provide oversight of the appeals received to resource consent decisions.
|
Information purposes
Monthly report
|
ü
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Regulatory Services
Directorate
Director Regulatory Services
|
Report on:
· progress
implementing the Food Act 2014
· insights into
the performance, opportunities and risk of the Resources Consents Dept
· progress
implementing the Regulatory Compliance programme
· transformation
activity update
· building
consents and control
· resource
consents and regulatory engineering
|
For
information only:
6 monthly
updates
Progress to Date:
Provide the Regulatory Committee with an overview and an
update on performance, opportunities and risks of Regulatory Services
17 November 2020
Link to PowerPoint presentation
Memo update: Hearings held April 2020 to March 2021
Link to memo
11 May 2021
Link to PowerPoint presentation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bylaw project initiation report
|
To formally
initiate the commencement of bylaw-related projects in 2022
|
Decision
on whether to initiate the commencement of bylaw-related projects in 2022,
including their high-level scope and local board significance as part of a
co-governance approach adopted in 2019.
|
|
ü
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Traffic Bylaw Review
Community and Social Policy
|
This Bylaw
regulates the use of vehicles on council-controlled land that is not part of
the Auckland transport system, like parks and beaches.
NB: This
Bylaw was made solely under the Land Transport Act 1998 and does not expire.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed to
confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a
proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Updated
to commence October 2022. Findings report scheduled for mid-2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Air Quality Bylaw for Indoor Domestic Fires
Community and Social Policy
|
This Bylaw
sets standards for indoor domestic fires and what may be burnt in them.
This Bylaw
must be reviewed by 25 May 2022. If this date is missed, a new bylaw must (if
necessary) be made to avoid a regulatory gap.
|
Decision
on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether to confirm, amend, replace or
revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw
Panel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Control
Community and Social Policy
|
To review the
rules to manage activities at council cemeteries and crematoria relating to
burial, cremation, disinterment, built structures, Wāhi Tapu Māori
Areas, ground maintenance and record-keeping under the Cemeteries and
Crematoria Bylaw 2014
|
Decision on whether a change to the bylaw
control is required.
First
report scheduled for mid-2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health and Hygiene Bylaw Control
Community and Social Policy
|
To review
minimum standards to protect public health associated with commercial services
that pierce, risk breaking or risk burning the skin or tissue, therapeutic
massage, colon hydrotherapy, swimming pools, water play parks and splash pads
under the Health and Hygiene Bylaw 2013
|
Decision on whether a change to the bylaw
control is required.
First
report scheduled for mid-2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signage at off-licence premises
Community and Social Policy
|
To
investigate regulatory options to restrict the size, number, content and
marketing of alcohol on signage and the use of neutral colours on buildings
associated with off-licence premises and visible from a council controlled
public place in accordance with Regulatory Committee resolution REG/2020/66.
|
Decision on
preferred regulatory option in relation to signs at off-licence premises and
determination of next steps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Set net fishing ban at Matakatia Bay (Hibiscus and
Bays)
Community and Social Policy
|
To assess a
request contained in Regulatory Committee resolution REG/2021/83 for a set
net fishing ban under the Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw
2013.
|
Decision on
whether to make a set net fishing ban at Matakatia Bay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bylaw project initiation report
|
To formally
initiate the commencement of bylaw-related projects in 2022
|
Decision
on whether to initiate the commencement of bylaw-related projects in 2022,
including their high-level scope and local board significance as part of a
co-governance approach adopted in 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Traffic Bylaw Review
Community and Social Policy
|
This Bylaw
regulates the use of vehicles on council-controlled land that is not part of
the Auckland transport system, like parks and beaches.
NB: This
Bylaw was made solely under the Land Transport Act 1998 and does not expire.
|
Decision
on whether a bylaw is still needed to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the
bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Updated to
commence October 2022. Findings report scheduled for mid-2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Completed
|
|
Lead Department
|
Area of work
|
Committee role
(decision and/or direction)
|
Decision
|
|
Community & Social Policy
|
Alcohol Control Bylaw review
This
Bylaw provides the structure for creating alcohol bans. Individual boards use
it to make decisions about local bans.
Council has a statutory obligation to review this
Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.
|
Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the
Governing Body to amend bylaw.
Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to
the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public
feedback and local board input.
Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in
February 2020.
|
Finding
Report 11 April 2019
Link to decision
Options
Report 9 May 2019
Link
to decision
Recommendation for Statement of Proposal
1 September 2020
Link to decision
Adopt Statement of Proposal –
Governing Body 29 October 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Licensing & Regulatory
Compliance
|
Animal Management
Report on Animal Management
activities for the year ending August/Sept 2020 as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996
|
Note: that the Animal Management
Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 and
staff will provide the 2019/2020 report to the Secretary of Local Government
|
Adopt the
2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report
Link to decision
Link to 2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report
|
|
Community
and Social Policy
|
Bylaw Review 2020-22 initiation
Initiation
of new bylaw reviews. Includes ‘Local Board Involvement in Regional
Policy, Plans and Bylaws - Agreed Principles and Processes 2019’
Council has a statutory obligation to periodically
review its bylaws.
|
Decision on the initiation of bylaw reviews that must be
completed by October 2022. Report will for each bylaw:
· set out scope
· legislative constraints/enablers (if any)
· relevance to LBs
· proposed process (including LB involvement)
· key timeframes
· public consultation approach
whether a joint working group
for early bylaw/policy development is proposed and initiate appointment
process if necessary.
|
Initiation Report 18 February 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Cemeteries Bylaw Review (Cemeteries and
Crematoria Bylaw 2014)
This
Bylaw and code of practice protects health and safety and minimises potential
offensive behaviour.
Council has a statutory
obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.
|
Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the
Governing Body to amend bylaw.
Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to
the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public
feedback and local board input.
Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in
February 2020.
|
Options
Report 9 April 2019
Link to decision
Direction
Report 9 May 2019
Link to decision
Proposal
to amend 1 September 2020
Link to decision
Adopt
Statement of Proposal – Governing Body 24 September 2020
Link to decision
Adopt the amended Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014
link to decision
|
|
Building Consents
|
Earthquake Prone, Dangerous & Insanitary
Buildings Policy 2011 -2016 Review
2011
- Auckland Council was required under
s131 of the Building Act 2004 to adopt a policy on earthquake prone,
dangerous and insanitary buildings
2018
– Due to the Building
(Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016, Auckland Council’s
management of earthquake-prone buildings now falls under the national policy
and methodology set by MBIE. Our ongoing work programme for issuing statutory
EPB notices, receiving seismic assessments, and identifying residual
potential EPBs is being carried out on this basis.
Note that dangerous and
insanitary buildings continue to have their own local policy that is now
under the management of Regulatory Compliance.
|
Update: on the progress made in implementing Auckland
Council’s regulatory obligations with regard to earthquake-prone
buildings within its jurisdiction.
|
Approve
submission 28 July 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Food Bylaw Review
|
Appoint Bylaw Panel
Decision
on bylaw - Due to COVID-19 the decision went to the Governing Body
|
Adoption 30 April 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Freedom Camping
This
Bylaw replaces legacy requirements to manage freedom camping in vehicles,
under the Freedom Camping Act.
The legacy bylaws expiry on 29 October 2022.
|
Decision on options to
progress a council approach for a Statement of Proposal on freedom camping in
vehicles.
|
Deferred to Governing Body
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Gambling Policy Reviews
The Gambling Act 2003 and the Racing Act 2003 (the
Acts) regulate gambling in New Zealand. The
Acts require the policies to be reviewed every three years. Auckland Council
(Council) first adopted these policies in 2013.
Council reviewed them in 2017,
found they were generally effective and retained both with no changes.
|
Decision: start of
the Class 4 Gambling (pokie) Venue Policy and the Racing Board (TAB) Venue
Policy reviews in 2020
Council reviewed in 2020,
retain both with no changes.
|
start policy
reviews 17 March 2020
Link to decision
findings review 13 October 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Navigation Safety Bylaw Review
This Bylaw sets out the rules for all vessels and people
using Auckland's waters to ensure their safety.
Council has a statutory
obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw (findings and options reports).
|
Findings
Report 17 March 2020
Link to decision
Options
Report 23 June 2020
Link to decision
Recommend statement of proposal 13 October 2020
link to decision
Adopt
statement of proposal – Governing Body – 29 October 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw
Review
This Bylaw applies to a range of outdoor fire activities,
including outdoor cooking and heating fires, sky lanterns, traditional
cooking fires, open air fires and incinerator fires.
This Bylaw expires on 18 December 2021 and must (if
necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap.
Findings resulted in decision to revoke bylaw
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw (findings and options reports).
|
Findings
and Options Report 13 October 2020
Link to decision
Review
findings – Governing Body – 29 October 2020
Link to decision
|
|
Democracy Services
|
The Regulatory Committee
Policy
The Policy incorporates the
operational policy and sub delegations for the decision-making
responsibilities that lie within the areas of the committee’s
responsibilities.
Review District Licensing
Committee (DLC) and Independent Resource Management Act (RMA) commissioner
pools.
|
Decision: adopt the updated Regulatory Committee Policy
Decision:
approve the appointment of the District Licensing Committee and the selection process and appointments of independent
resource management commissioners for 2021 to 2024.
|
Recruitment
process for DLC Commissioners 12 November 2019
– Governing Body
Link to decision
30 April
2020, due to COVID19 appointment of District Licensing Committee went go to
Emergency Committee
Link to decision
Appointment
of DLC Committee 30 April 2020
Link to decision
Approval
to commence recruitment RMA Commissioners 23 June 2020
Link to decision
Adoption of the Regulatory Committee policy 28 July 2020
Link to decision
Recommendation for the appointment of independent
hearings commissioners
Link to decision
|
|
Watercare / Community and
Social Policy
|
Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015
This bylaw
protects Auckland’s water sources, water supply and wastewater networks
from damage, misuse and interference.
This Bylaw will expire on 25
June 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw
to avoid a regulatory gap
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still need and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
May 2020,
due to COVID-19 findings report went to Emergency Committee
Findings
Report 28 May 2020-Emergency Committee
Link to decision
Review Options 23 June 2020
Link to decision
Recommendation
for Statement of Proposal 16 February 2021
Link to decision
Adopt
Statement of Proposal – Governing Body – 25 February 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Animal
management Bylaw Review
This
Bylaw promotes responsible animal ownership, including minimising impact on
neighbours, the public and preventing damage.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress
to Date:
Findings
Report 17 March 2020
Link to decision
Options Report 17 November 2020
Link to decision
Decision Report 11 May 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Construction
Bylaw 2015
Bylaw relates
to construction activity on or near public places or infrastructure.
This
Bylaw will expire on 29 October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still
necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress
to Date:
Decision
report 14 September 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Property
Maintenance Nuisance Bylaw Review
This
Bylaw requires private property to be maintained well enough that doesn't
create a nuisance or risk health and safety.
Council
has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government
Act 2002.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress
to Date:
Review
and Findings Report 1 September 2020
Link to decision
Options
report 17 August 2021
Link to decision
Decision
report 14 September 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Signage
Bylaw Review
This is
a joint bylaw with Auckland Transport that regulates promotional signs to
ensure public safety and prevent nuisance from poorly maintained or located
signage.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress
to Date:
Findings
Report 23 June 2020
Link to decision
Options
report 13 October 2020
Link to decision
Detailed
Options report 20 April 2020
Link to decision
Decision
report 17 August 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Healthy Waters / Community
and Social Policy
|
Stormwater
Bylaw
The
primary purpose of the Bylaw is to regulate land drainage including to
protect, manage and maintain an efficient and effective public stormwater
network, as well as the ensure the maintenance and operation of private
stormwater systems.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress
to Date:
Findings
Report 28 July 2020
Link to decision
Options Report 16 March 2021
Link to decision
Decision report 17
August 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Trading and Events Bylaw Review
This Bylaw regulates businesses and events that use public
spaces to make sure everyone can use them fairly and safely.
This
Bylaw expires on 22 February 2022 and must (if necessary) be replaced to
avoid a regulatory gap.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress to Date:
Findings Report 13 October 2020
Link to decision
Options Report 16 February 2021
Link to decision
Decision
report 11 May 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Community and Social Policy
|
Wharves
Bylaw 2015
Bylaw
relates to use of council-controlled wharves.
This Bylaw will expire on 29
October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new
bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and
whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke
the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
Progress to Date:
Decision Report 14 September 2021
Link to decision
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
Objection to Nuisance Abatement Notice
by Susan Nerney
File No.: CP2022/09085
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
hear and determine the objection by Susan NERNEY against a Nuisance Abatement
Notice (NAN) issued on 25 March 2022 pursuant to section 55(1)(b) of the Dog
Control Act 1996 (DCA).
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Ms
Nerney is the primary owner of an 8-year-old female, black and tan, Doberman
dog called Freya. Since September 2021, Animal Management has received several
complaints about Freya’s barking.
3. Section
55 of the DCA provides that upon receipt of a complaint about a dog barking or
howling, a dog control officer may issue a nuisance abatement notice to the
owner of the dog if the officer is satisfied on reasonable grounds that a
nuisance is being created by the loud and persistent barking or howling of that
dog.
4. The
DCA does not define ‘loud’ or ‘persistent. They must be
interpreted according to their general meaning and usage. The third edition of
the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary defines ‘persistent’
as: ‘Of an action or condition: Continuous, constantly
repeated’. ‘Constantly’ in turns means
‘continually recurring’. ‘Loud’ means: ‘Of sounds or
voices: Strongly audible, striking forcibly on the sense of
hearing’.
5. The
DCA does not define ‘nuisance’, but it is akin to a tort of private
nuisance. For the purposes of the DCA a nuisance is created by the loud
and persistent barking or howling of a dog if it unreasonably interferes,
disrupts, or inhibits the activities ordinarily carried out by an occupant of
residential property.
6. Nuisance
is objectively determined on a balance of probabilities.
7. The
probabilities in this case support the conclusion that Freya is barking loudly
and persistently which is causing a nuisance to the complainant.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) hear
and determine the objection to the Noise Abatement Notice, and
b) uphold
the Noise Abatement Notice.
Horopaki
Context
8. The
Governing Body of the Auckland Council has delegated to the Regulatory
Committee the responsibility for regulatory hearings in Resolution No.
GB/2019/109 which was adopted on 12 November 2019. The regulatory
hearings which the Regulatory Committee is responsible include, amongst others,
decisions under the DCA in relation to the consideration of objections under
the DCA.
9. A
NAN is issued under section 55(1) of the DCA if the Auckland Council receives a
complaint about barking dogs and upon investigation a dog control officer has
reasonable grounds for believing that a nuisance is being created by the
persistent and loud barking or howling.
10. The
DCA does not define ‘persistent’ or ‘loud’. Officers
are guided by their general meaning and usage to determine whether barking is
persistent and loud. According to the third edition of the Shorter Oxford
English Dictionary:
a) ‘Persistent’ means: ‘Of an action or
condition: Continuous, constantly repeated’.
‘Constantly’ in turns means ‘continually recurring’. It
follows that continuous barking over a prolonged period, or periodical but
consistent barking is regarded as persistent, and that intermittent or
occasional barking is not persistent.
b) ‘Loud’
means: ‘Of sounds or voices: Strongly
audible, striking forcibly on the sense of hearing’.
11. The
DCA also does not define when the loud and persistent barking of a dog becomes
a nuisance. It is however akin to a tort of private nuisance which is the
unlawful interference with a specific person’s use or enjoyment of the
property they are occupying.
For the purposes of the DCA the
nuisance caused by a barking or howling dog must be more than irritation or
annoyance. It must be such that it unreasonably or unjustifiably interferes,
disrupts, or inhibits the activities ordinarily carried out by an occupant of
residential property.
There is no exact rule of formula for a
dog control officer to determine when the barking or howling is unreasonable
but, as with a tort, the objective standard of a reasonable person is applied.
This means that a nuisance under section 55 of the DCA is created if an officer
is satisfied on the established facts that the loud and persistent barking or
howling would probably interfere with the average person’s activities on
their property.
12. A
NAN requires the owner of the dogs causing a nuisance to make reasonable
provisions on their property to abate that nuisance. These provisions are
stipulated in the NAN. The owner is given a seven-day grace period to either
comply with or object to the notice.
13. It
is an offence under section 55(7) of the DCA if an owner who did not object to
the notice, fails to comply with the provisions in the NAN any time after the
seven-day grace period.
14. An
objection suspends the operation and enforcement of the NAN. The objection may
be directed at the reasonableness of the provisions prescribed in the NAN, or
it may question the grounds for issuing the NAN in the first place.
15. In
considering the objection to a NAN, the Regulatory Committee must have regard
to:
a. the
evidence which led to the issuing of the notice
b. any
evidence that that the objector and their witnesses may present during the
hearing, and
c. any
other relevant matters.
16. Section
55(3) of the DCA determines that the Regulatory Committee may:
a. confirm
the NAN
b. modify
the requirements stipulated in the NAN, or
c. cancel
the NAN.
Background
Earlier complaints
17. Ms
Nerney resides in a Residential property in Manly, Auckland. She is the
registered owner of an 8-year-old, female, black and tan Doberman dog called
Freya.
18. During
the period September 2021 to May 2022, Animal Management received complaints
from an occupant of a neighbouring property, about Freya’s barking.
Ms Nerney was supplied with educational material on the possible reasons for
and abatement of dogs barking.
19. Since
9 September 2021 Animal Management received numerous complaints from an occupant
of a neighbouring property about Freya’s loud and persistent barking:
a. RFS
8100910001 received 29 September 2021
The complainant said that the dog
started barking at 6 am and continued throughout the day until it was taken in
at night. He says that dog owner is very aggressive and swears at them.
Police attended on Sunday due to the owner’s alleged aggression towards
the complainant and his wife.
On 30 September 2021, a Barking
Complaints Advisor (BCA) contacted the complainant to get more details. They
confirmed that the dog causing the nuisance belongs to the dwelling at the back
of the section, referring to the dwellinghouse of Ms Nerney. He also
confirmed that there were two dogs on the property but the one causing the
nuisance was the black and tan dog. The complainant stated that it is reactive
barking as the dog barks at any movement or sound. The barking continues
throughout the day. They suggested to Ms Nerney to put up a fence and she
agreed. Although, Ms Nerney later decided not to share the cost as she
could not afford it.
On the same day, Ms Nerney was notified
by email of the complaint and given information on the causes of dogs barking
and methods to employ to reduce the barking, refer Attachment A. Note
that the message in the email refers to “Sally” which is not the
correct name of the dog owner. However, the message was sent to the correct
email address and subsequent telephone conversations with Ms Susan Nerney
confirmed that she received the email.
Ms Nerney called and spoke to a Barking
Complaint Advisor (BCA). She said that the complainant has been throwing a ball
close to the fence which excites her dog. She said that it is just a bullying
tactic from her neighbour and that no one else has a problem with it. Ms
Nerney says that she keeps her dog away from the fence and takes the dog with
her when she is out as she worries about what they will do to her. The BCA
explained the process in full and discussed possible enforcement actions if the
dog continues to be a nuisance.
b. RFS
8100924556 received 23 October 2021
The complainant said that the dog
started barking at 6 am and continues to bark throughout the day until the dog
is taken in at night. Complainant said that the owner was encouraging the
barking behaviour.
On 26 October 2021, a Barking
Complaints Investigator (BCI) spoke with the complainant who has said that he was planting a hedge between his property and
Ms Nerney’s property when the dog called Freya came out and was barking
aggressively at the fence at him. Ms Nerney came out and told the dog that she
was a good girl but never reprimanded the dog at all. The dog will also be let
out on a weekend at about 6 am and will run around barking and also run down to
the gate and bark at anything that goes past. At no time does the owner call
the dog back.
On the same day, a notification email
was sent to Ms Nerney with the information brochures explaining why dogs bark
excessively and ways to reduce the nuisance, refer Attachment B.
On 28 October 2021, Ms Nerney spoke
with a BCI and said that the dogs are inside during the night but have access
through a dog door, if needed. If she is away, then someone normally comes over
to sit with the dogs or the dogs are taken to a friend to be looked after.
On 4 November 2021, a BCI has contacted
the complainant to get an update on the barking. The complainant advised that
the barking continues. The wife of the complainant sent an email with details
of the barking, refer Attachment C.
On the same day, a Formal Warning letter
was sent to Ms Nerney, refer Attachment D.
c. RFS
8100979475 received 17 January 2022
The complainant said that the dog barks
all the time whenever anyone passes by on the street or if they see them. Dog
description: one dog is black and tan, and the other dog is black white and
tan. These dogs constantly bark and set off the other neighbouring dogs barking
as well. They also bark every time the complainant goes out and comes towards
the bordering fence.
On 18 January 2022, several voice
recordings of barking were provided by the complainant. After listening to
them, the BCI decided that a property inspection was necessary to move further
in the process.
d. RFS
8100987291 dated 27 January 2022 – A Proactive Request for property
Inspection
On 1 February 2022, a BCI spoke with Ms
Nerney to organise an inspection of her property.
On 3 February 2022, we received a
response email dated 2 February 2022 from Ms Nerney as per Attachment E.
Emails were also received from two friends in support of Ms Nerney dated 4
February 2022 and 15 February 2022, refer Attachment F. One of the friends
supporting Ms Nerney resides about 2 streets away which is about 100 metres and
the other friend lives about 600 metres away. The complainant lives next door
to Ms Nerney.
On 3 February 2022, a property
inspection was completed. The purpose of the inspection was to determine what
steps the owners could take to abate the dog’s barking. The Bark
Investigator noted that boredom, separation anxiety and visual stimulation were
the causes of Freya’s barking.
On 14 February 2022, a Recommendation
Letter was sent to Ms Nerney with the following recommendations as per
Attachment G:
· To install a bark
box on the property.
· Walk the dog off
the property for at least 30 minutes twice each day.
· When not on the
property, to have either a dog sitter or have the dogs inside the house with a
TV or radio on.
· And to install a
shade cloth over the fence between the two
properties.
Complaint resulting in NAN
20. On
11 March 2022 Animal Management received a further complaint about
Freya’s barking. RFS 8101012780 refers. A BCI interviewed
the complainant and recorded his statement in writing. The statement discloses
that Freya was still barking loudly and persistently, and that it was causing a
nuisance to the complainant and his wife, refer Attachment H.
21. On
26 March 2022, a BCI issued a Nuisance Abatement Notice as per Attachment I and
a copy was hand-delivered to Ms Nerney which required her within 7 days of
receipt of the notice to take one of the following steps to abate the noise
nuisance caused by Freya’s barking:
a. Use a
correctly fitted and in working order Noise and Vibration anti-bark collar when
the dog is outside.
b. Dog
is to be kept in the house when owner is not on the property.
c. When
the dog starts barking, immediately call the dog away and put it in the house.
d. The
BCI’s formal statement about her investigation of the complaints is under
Attachment J.
22. On
30 March 2022, Ms Nerney objected to the NAN on the basis that the barking was
not causing a nuisance and referred to the emails sent by her other neighbours
in support of her position, refer Attachment K.
Subsequent complaints
23. Although
an objection suspends the operation of a NAN, Animal Management is still
obliged to investigate subsequent complaints in the event of the NAN being
confirmed and enforcement action being warranted:
a. RFS
8101044588 received 5 May 2022
The complainant’s formal
statement is under Attachment L. The complainant states that
despite the issuance of the Noise Abatement Notice, the dogs were barking
loudly and continuously all morning.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
24. Dobermans
are highly protective in nature and will seek to alert their household of any
suspicious or unusual activity. They may also bark a lot if they are
trying to communicate something to their owners, like boredom or needing some
exercise. Boredom is one of the causes that was identified by the Bark
Advisor.
25. Ms Nerney
concedes that Freya barks but puts it down to alert barking. Alert
barking can become a nuisance if it is excessive. In such instances a
responsible dog owner would take steps to minimise any audio or visual
stimulation that could lead to excessive barking.
26. The
complainant states that the barking deprives them of the full use and enjoyment
of their property. Freya barks at every sound and movement especially when the
complainant and his family are in their yard.
27. The video
clips that accompanied the complaint in the month of January 2022 are typical
of Freya’s barking. They were taken from the back and front yards of the
complainant’s property.
28. The
probabilities are that Freya is barking loudly and persistently which causes a
nuisance to others.
29. The Bark
Investigator has assessed that the use of a Noise and Vibration Anti-Bark
Collar bark box would best abate the nuisance.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
30. This is a
report about a nuisance caused by the loud and persistent barking of a
dog. It has no climate impact.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
31. This is a
report about a nuisance caused by the loud and persistent barking of a dog.
It does not require council group views.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
32. This
report has no local impact. Local Board views have not been sought.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
33. This
report has no impact on Māori.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
34. The
decision by the Regulatory Committee on the nuisance abatement notice has no
financial implications.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
35. There are
no risks in upholding the NAN.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
36. The
Regulatory Committee must give Ms Nerney written notice of its decision as soon
as practical.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Notification of barking complaint
|
57
|
|
b⇩
|
Advice to the dog owner
|
67
|
|
c⇩
|
Complainant provides details of barking
|
69
|
|
d⇩
|
Formal warning letter
|
73
|
|
e⇩
|
Email from dog owner
|
77
|
|
f⇩
|
Emails in support of the dog owner
|
79
|
|
g⇩
|
Recommendations letter
|
83
|
|
h⇩
|
Statement by complainant
|
85
|
|
i⇩
|
Nuisance Abatement Notice
|
87
|
|
j⇩
|
Statement by Barking Complaints Investigator
|
89
|
|
k⇩
|
Objection to Nuisance Abatement Notice
|
91
|
|
l⇩
|
Formal statement by complainant
|
93
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Angie Castro - Team Leader, Bark and Field, Animal
Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
Eleanor Waitoa, Manager Animal Management
James Hassall - General Manager, Licensing and
Regulatory Compliance
Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
|
Regulatory
Committee
05 July 2022
|
|
