1 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017 File No: 01-15-227 Notice of an ordinary meeting of the STRATEGY, POLICY & FINANCE COMMITTEE to be held Thursday 9 November 2017 at 9.30am in the Council Chamber, Rotorua Lakes Council Chairperson: Cr Hunt Members: Cr Raukawa-Tait Mayor Chadwick Cr Bentley Cr Donaldson Cr Gould Cr Kent Cr Maxwell Cr Sturt Cr Tapsell Cr Kumar E Berryman-Kamp G Mohi P Thomass S Trumper Quorum: 8 A G E N D A 1. APOLOGIES 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Members need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Council and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to review the matters on the agenda and assess and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be a perception of a conflict of interest. If a member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the meeting or of the relevant item of business and refrain from participating in the discussion or voting on that item. If a member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive or the Governance & Partnerships Manager (preferably before the meeting). It is noted that while members can seek advice the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the member.
Transcript
1 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017
File No: 01-15-227
Notice of an ordinary meeting of the
STRATEGY, POLICY & FINANCE COMMITTEE
to be held Thursday 9 November 2017 at 9.30am in the Council Chamber, Rotorua Lakes Council
Chairperson:
Cr Hunt
Members: Cr Raukawa-Tait Mayor Chadwick Cr Bentley Cr Donaldson Cr Gould Cr Kent Cr Maxwell Cr Sturt Cr Tapsell Cr Kumar E Berryman-Kamp G Mohi P Thomass S Trumper
Quorum: 8
A G E N D A
1. APOLOGIES 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Council and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to review the matters on the agenda and assess and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be a perception of a conflict of interest.
If a member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the meeting or of the relevant item of business and refrain from participating in the discussion or voting on that item. If a member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive or the Governance & Partnerships Manager (preferably before the meeting). It is noted that while members can seek advice the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the member.
2 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017
3. URGENT ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Section 46A of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 states: (7) An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at the 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. (7A) Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting, - (a) that item may be discussed at the 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.
Page
4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4.1 Minutes of the Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting held 12 October 2017 ............... 6 5. STAFF REPORTS RECOMMENDATION 1: Amendments to Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 ............. 12 RECOMMENDATION 2: Speed Limit Bylaw – Changes to Speed Limits ...................................... 35 RECOMMENDATION 3: Rotorua Special Housing Areas Policy .................................................. 50 RECOMMENDATION 4: Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts (SHMPAC) update .................... 65
Rotorua Lakes Council is the operating name of Rotorua District Council
3 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017
STRATEGY, POLICY AND FINANCE COMMITTEE DELEGATIONS
Type of Committee Committee
Subordinate to Council
Subordinate Committees
Legislative Basis Schedule 7, clause 30 (1) (a), Local Government Act 2002.
Purpose The purpose of the Strategy, Policy and Finance Committee is to have oversight and make recommendations to the Council on the adoption and development of all Council’s strategic, policy, planning and regulatory frameworks.
Reference 01-15-227
Membership Councillor Raukawa-Tait (Chair) Councillor Hunt (Deputy Chair) The Mayor and all councillors 2 Te Tatau o Te Arawa members 1 Lakes Community Board member 1 Rural Community Board member Full voting rights for all members
Quorum
8
Meeting frequency
Monthly
Delegations The Committee’s function is recommendatory only.1 It is authorised to take actions precedent to the exercise by the Council of its statutory responsibilities, duties and powers, by:
Receiving, considering, hearing submissions and making recommendations on draft plans (except the District Plan), strategies and policies (such as the Long-term Plan, Annual Plan; funding and financial policies; reserves management plans and asset management plans);
Considering and making recommendations on the development of the Council’s rating policy; financial strategy and budgets;
Considering and making recommendations on the development of Council bylaws, including hearing submissions in relation to making, amending and revoking bylaws;
Considering and making recommendations on Council’s strategic direction to ensure efficient and effective delivery of Council’s objectives and District Vision;
Receiving and considering reports from working/strategy groups;
Considering and making recommendations on the development of guidelines for decision making to assist Council in achieving its strategic outcomes;
1 Council is authorised to delegate anything precedent to the exercise of Council’s powers, duties and functions - Schedule 7, clause 32, Local
Government Act 2002
4 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017
Considering and making recommendations on the establishment of levels of service across Council services to ensure alignment with strategic goals and priorities;
Considering and making recommendations on the development of Treasury and funding functions;
Considering and making recommendations on proposals for the establishment of Council controlled organisations (including the appointment and remuneration of Directors, formation of constitutions and shareholder agreements);
Considering and making recommendations on proposals for the sale and purchase of land;
Considering and making recommendations on issues relating to Council leases;
Considering and making recommendations on draft Council submissions/responses in relation to: o Central government policies, plans and proposed legislative
reform; o Proposals by other organisations/authorities (Local and
Regional).
Performing such other functions as the Council may direct from time to time.2
Relevant Statutes All the duties and responsibilities listed above must be carried out in accordance with the relevant legislation.
Limits to Delegations The Committee does not have the delegated authority to make decisions for and on behalf of the Council. All matters requiring a decision of Council must be referred, by way of recommendation, to the Council for final consideration and determination. In the event that the Council resolves not to approve or adopt a Committee recommendation, the item shall be returned to the Committee via the Chief Executive for review and subsequent referral to the Council for further consideration and determination.
2 A committee is subject in all things to the control of the local authority, and must carry out all general and special directions of the Council given in
relation to the committee - see Schedule 7, clause 30(3), Local Government Act 2002.
held Thursday, 12 October 2017 at 9.30am in the Council Chamber, Rotorua Lakes Council
MEMBERS PRESENT: Cr Raukawa-Tait (Chairperson)
Mayor Chadwick, Cr Donaldson, Cr Gould, Cr Hunt (Deputy Chair), Cr Kent, Cr Kumar, Cr Maxwell, Cr Sturt, Cr Tapsell, Mr Berryman-Kamp and Mrs Mohi (Te Tatau o Te Arawa), Mr Thomass (Lakes Community Board) and Mrs Trumper (Rural Community Board).
APOLOGIES: Cr Bentley
STAFF PRESENT: J-P Gaston, Group Manager Strategy; M Morrison, Kaitiaki Maori; T Collé, CFO/Group Manager Business Support; H Weston, Acting Group Manager Operations; S Michael, General Manager Infrastructure; C Tiriana, Manager CE’s Office; O Hopkins, Manager Corporate Planning and Governance; D Cossar, Policy Advisor (part); I Tiriana, Manager Council Communications; R Viskovic, Strategic Development Manager (part); T Tomlinson, Legal and Property Manager; C Peden, Governance Support Advisor.
The Chairperson welcomed everyone present and declared the meeting open. 1. APOLOGIES
Resolved: That the apologies from Cr Bentley be accepted.
Cr Gould/Cr Kent CARRIED
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST None. 3. URGENT ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None.
1. That the report “Review of Policy Register” be received.
Mayor Chadwick/Cr Gould CARRIED
ATTENDANCE: Cr Kumar joined the meeting at 9.45am. Further resolved:
2. That the Committee recommends to Council to approve the review of the Policy Register, including the changes to existing policies as amended (Attachment 1a), and that Council policies including deletion of policies is programmed within the Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee’s work plan for review (Attachment 1b).
5.3 RECOMMENDATION 3: TRANSFER OF THERMAL HOLIDAY PARK TO NGĀTI WHAKAUE 01-15-227 Resolved:
1. That the report ‘Transfer of Thermal Holiday Park to Ngāti Whakaue’ be received.
Cr Maxwell/Mayor Chadwick CARRIED
2. That the committee recommends to Council that the land shown as “B” is surveyed and
amalgamated by Council with the adjacent land known as “Centennial Park” (Attachment 3). 3. That the committee recommends to Council that, subsequent to the amalgamation outlined
in Recommendation 2 above, Council completes an agreement between Council, Crown, Toi-Ohomai (as owner of the leasehold interest) and Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust, outlining the intention that the land comprising the Thermal Holiday Park and shown as “A” is returned to Ngāti Whakaue by way of the vehicle of Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust (Attachment 3).
4. That the committee recommends that Council, upon the execution of the agreement referred
to above, notifies the Minister of Conservation that the recreation reserve status of the Thermal Holiday Park land should be revoked in accordance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and on the basis that it is no longer being used in accordance with the intent of the original gift.
Mayor Chadwick/Cr Sturt SPF17/10/046
CARRIED 5.4 RECOMMENDATION 4: REVIEW OF GENERAL BYLAW 2011 01-63-107-22 Resolved:
1. That the report ‘Review of General Bylaw 2011’ be received.
Mrs Trumper/Cr Donaldson CARRIED
2. That consideration has been given to the requirements of the Local Government Act
2002 and following a review, it is proposed that no amendments be made to the General Bylaw 2011.
3. That the committee recommend to Council to resolve that, in accordance with clause
206.3 of the Public Places section of the General Bylaw 2011, the First Schedule to the Public Places section of the General Bylaw 2011 showing areas where persons shall not ride a skateboard, be replaced with a replacement map, as attached to this report (Attachment 4).
7. CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS 7.1 Confidential minutes of Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting 14 September 2017
Resolved: That the confidential minutes of the Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting held 14 September 2017 be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Cr Kent/Cr Tapsell CARRIED
______________________ Meeting closed at 12.43pm ______________________
To be confirmed at a Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting on 9 November 2017
………….……………………………
Chairperson Action Points
The amended ‘Property Disposal Policy’ to be circulated and reviewed with the Te Tatau o Te Arawa board in advance of recommendation to Council.
Rotorua Lakes Council is the operating name of Rotorua District Council Note 1: Rotorua Lakes Council is the operations name of Rotorua District Council Note 2: Attachment to these minutes are available on request or on Council’s website www.rotorualc.nz
Mayor Chairperson and Members STRATEGY, POLICY & FINANCE COMMITTEE NAME AMENDMENTS TO ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL TRAFFIC BYLAW 2015 Report prepared by: Rosemary Viskovic, Strategic Development Manager Report reviewed by: Jean-Paul Gaston, Group Manager Strategy Report approved by: Geoff Williams, Chief Executive
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Report is to approve for special consultation, amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 to include clearer provisions for ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’.
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A review of the General Bylaw 2011 was undertaken by officers and no amendments were proposed to that Bylaw. During the review, officers identified that the mechanisms used by Council to regulate ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’ should be clarified. As a consequence, officers recommend amending the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 to include provisions defining and regulating ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’. This will require a Statement of Proposal and proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 be approved for special consultation and that Council hear and deliberate on any public submissions made to the proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015.
3. RECOMMENDATION 1: 1. That the “Amendments to Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015” Report be received.
2. That the Committee recommend to Council that attached Statement of Proposal and
proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 (that include new provisions regulating ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’) be approved for special consultation and that Council hear and deliberate on any public submissions made to the proposed amendments.
The Strategy Team is responsible for the review of all Council bylaws and works together with the various departments that ensure compliance with and enforcement of the bylaws. The Rotorua Lakes Council has 15 bylaws. These are rules made by the Council that affect and regulate certain activities in the community. They cover health, safety and a range of environmental issues. Every few years the Council is required by the Local Government Act 2002 to review its bylaws.
During the recent review of the General Bylaw 2011, officers identified that the mechanisms used by Council to regulate ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’ should be clarified. As a consequence, officers recommend amending the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 to include provisions defining and regulating ‘shared paths’ and ‘shared zones’.
5. DISCUSSION AND OPTIONS
Amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015
The Council is empowered by sections 145 and 146 of the Local Government Act 2002 to make bylaws concerning matters covered by the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015. Shared Paths The Urban Cycleways Programme began in 2014 with the aim of making significant improvements to cycling infrastructure in New Zealand’s main urban areas. In Rotorua, a city-wide network of cycleways is being established which will connect suburbs and main arterial routes to the CBD, some major tourist attractions and to the Whakarewarewa Forest / Redwoods area. Many of the cycleways allow for shared use by cyclists and pedestrians. To better regulate the cycleways for shared use by cyclists and pedestrians, officers propose to establish a power similar to that adopted by other Councils3 to establish and regulate the use of shared paths under a bylaw. Officers recommend that the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 be amended to include these provisions, as follows:
Amend the definitions clause of the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following definition of “shared path”:
Shared path means a cycle path, a cycle track, a footpath, or some other kind of path that may be used by some or all of the following persons at the same time – (a) cyclists; (b) pedestrians; (c) riders of mobility devices; and (d) riders of wheeled recreational devices.
Amend the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following provisions as new clause 30 and renumbering the remaining clauses of the bylaw:
3 See the proposed Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.
30.1.1 Determine the length, route and/or location of a shared path; and 30.1.2 Determine priority for users on a shared path.
30.2 No person may use a shared path in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the Council under this clause.
Shared Zones Shared zones aim to remove the segregation of road users so that pedestrians also share the roadway and, as such, no formal footpaths are required. The concept relies on the removal of typical street elements including line-markings, signage and kerbs, with the addition of extra street furniture such as seats, cycle parking and landscaping. This results in an intentional level of ambiguity so that drivers proceed with caution and at slow speeds. People cycling and driving in shared zones are expected to travel in a way that is consistent with a walking pace, and are legally required to give way to pedestrians. The Council is considering establishing ‘shared zones’ in areas of the CBD.
To better provide for shared zones, officers propose to establish a power similar to that adopted by other Councils4 to establish and regulate the use of shared zones under a bylaw. Officers recommend that the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 be amended to include provisions concerning shared paths, as follows:
Amend the definitions clause of Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following definition of “shared zone”:
Shared zone means a length of roadway intended to be used by pedestrians and vehicles (including cyclists).
Amend the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following provisions as new clause 31 and renumbering the remaining clauses of the bylaw:
31 Shared zones
31.1 Council may by resolution specify any road or part of a road to be a shared zone.
31.2 Any resolution made under this clause may specify:
31.2.1 Whether the shared zone may be used by specified classes of vehicles;
31.2.2 The days and hours of operation of the shared zone (if they differ from 24 hours per day, 7 days per week); and
31.2.3 Any other restrictions on how the shared zone is to be used by the public,
including how traffic and pedestrians will interact.
4 See the proposed Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.
31.3 Except where the Council has by resolution specified otherwise, no person may stand or park a vehicle in a road or part of a road specified as a shared zone.
31.4 No person may use a shared zone in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the
Council under this clause.
Further considerations Section 160 of the Local Government Act 2002 requires that the Council must review or amend a bylaw by making the determinations required by section 155.
Officers have also concluded that the proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 are the most appropriate way of addressing the regulation of shared paths and shared zones. Although other options, such as having no bylaw, relying only on education/information or general legal requirements are possible, officers recommend the proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 as being the most appropriate options as these provide for greater certainty and are enforceable by the Council.
Officers recommend that the proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 as being the most appropriate form of bylaw.
The proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 are considered to be consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and do not raise any implications under this Act. The proposed amendments do not place any unjustified limitations on freedom of movement, expression or association. Offences against the Bylaw require a judicial process through a summary conviction, which provides alleged offenders with opportunities for defence.
In terms of the four general requirements for making a valid bylaw, the Local Government Act 2002 empowers the Council to make and amend bylaws. The proposed amendments to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 are not repugnant to the general laws of New Zealand. They impose reasonable restrictions that afford better outcomes for the health and safety of the general public and protection of Council’s assets.
In light of decision-making under sections 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 and 82 of the Local Government Act 2002, as noted above, although other options, such as having no bylaw, relying only on education/information or general legal requirements are possible, the benefits of a bylaw (and amendments to a bylaw) as an option outweigh the costs in terms of the present and future interests of the district. A bylaw (and amendments to a bylaw) also better promotes or achieves community outcomes (such as health and safety) as expressed in the Rotorua 2030 Goals in a more integrated and efficient manner than having no bylaw or no amendments. In terms of the impact of these options on the Council’s capacity to meet present and future needs in relation to any statutory responsibility, Council has the capacity and resources to monitor and enforce the Bylaw.
The views and preferences of certain stakeholders, other regulators and the general public who are affected by, or have an interest in, the Bylaw have been considered.
Doc No. RDC-777331 9 November 2017 6. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 The proposed amendments are considered significant in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Policy on Significance. As a significant decision, the Council must apply greater diligence to the decision making requirements of the Local Government Act 2002. This includes, but is not limited to, the degree to which different options are identified and assessed and the extent to which community views are considered. In addition, the Council is required to consult publicly on the amendment in accordance with the special consultative procedure.
7. COMMUNITY INPUT/ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLICITY
Following approval from the Council, the Statement of Proposal on the amendment to the Traffic Bylaw will be available for community engagement using the special consultative procedure from 23 November 2017 until 15 January 2018. Following written submissions, a hearings panel will be convened to hear any submitters and deliberate on the submissions and consider what changes need to be made as a result. A Report will then be drafted for adoption by the Council.
8. CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 Financial/budget considerations Costs associated with conducting this bylaw amendment are within existing budgets. The changes recommended within this review are not expected to have a significant impact on future operating costs.
8.2 Policy and planning implications The recommended changes to the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 are consistent with the Rotorua 2030 Vision and Portfolio Strategies.
8.3 Risks No significant risks have been identified.
8.4 Authority The Committee has the authority to make the resolutions included within this report.
9. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 (Tracked Changes) Pages 17 - 30 Attachment 2: Statement of Proposal for Amendment of the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 Pages 31-34
Preliminary 1 Introduction 1.1 In pursuance of the powers and authorities vested in it by the Local Government Act 2002 and
Transport Act 1962 and their amendments and regulations, and of all and every other power and authority in that behalf enabling it, Rotorua District Council hereby resolves to make the following Bylaw.
1.2 This Bylaw shall be referred to as “Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2008”. 1.3 This Bylaw shall come into force and take effect on the 23 day of December 2015. 1.4 This Bylaw revokes the previous Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2008, dated 12 September
2008. 1.5 Notwithstanding that this 2015 version of the Rotorua District Traffic Bylaw 2008 revokes the
previous Bylaw, dated 12 September 2008, all resolutions of Council which were in force in respect of that Bylaw and the Rotorua District Traffic Bylaw 1990 shall continue in force as if such resolutions had been passed immediately after the adoption of this Bylaw. Any reference in such resolutions to clauses in the previous Bylaw shall be deemed to be a reference to the appropriate clauses in this Bylaw. This clause shall only apply to the extent that such resolutions are not inconsistent with this Bylaw.
2 Objective 2.1 The objective of this Bylaw is to set the requirements for the parking and associated control of
vehicular or other traffic on any road in the District, including state highways located within any urban boundaries that are otherwise controlled by the New Zealand Transport Agency.
3 Interpretation 3.1 In this Bylaw, unless inconsistent with the context:
authorised officer means an employee of Council authorised to carry out any of the duties provided for in this Bylaw.
authorised period means:
a) That period of time commencing when the prescribed parking fee is inserted into a parking meter and ending when the parking meter indicates that the period has expired.
b) That period of time commencing when the prescribed parking fee is inserted into a pay and display parking meter and ending when the expiry time noted on the parking receipt has expired.
c) That period of time commencing when a vehicle is parked within an area which Council by resolution has designated as a “time limited” area and in which the appropriate sign(s) have been erected.
authorised time in relation to any coupon means that period of time, commencing when the coupon is activated, for which the coupon authorises the parking of a vehicle in a particular coupon parking area as determined by a notice displayed by Council in that area.
bus has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
bus lane has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
Council means the Rotorua District Council.
coupon means a ticket entitling the holder to park within a defined coupon parking area.
coupon parking area means any area of land belonging to or under the control of Council which is authorised, by resolution of Council pursuant to Clause 13 of this Bylaw, as a place where vehicles may be parked using parking coupons.
coupon parking space means a parking space or section in a coupon parking area indicated by and lying within markings made by Council for the parking of a motor vehicle.
cycle has the same meaning as in the Land Transport Road User Rule 2004.
cycle lane has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
cycle path has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
designated means specified by Council by resolution.
District means the Rotorua District as from time to time constituted.
driver has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
enforcement officer has the same meaning as in the Land Transport Act 1998.
footpath has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
goods vehicle has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
heavy motor vehicle has the same meaning as in the Land Transport Act 1998.
loading zone means an area of marked roadway designated for the purpose of loading or unloading goods for a specified time period or periods.
meter hood means a bag or sign issued by Council for the purpose of indicating a temporary discontinuance of a parking space.
metered space means a parking space at which a parking meter or pay and display parking meter has been installed and is maintained.
mobility concession card means a card issued by the CCS Disability Action, or a similar organisation authorised by Council, which is to be displayed in vehicles operated by disabled persons and for which certain parking concessions are available.
motorcycle has the same meaning as defined in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
motor vehicle has the same meaning as in the Land Transport Act 1998..
parking has the same meaning as defined in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
parking fee means the fee payable for the parking of vehicle/s within a metered space for a permitted period. The term includes payment by coins or by any other means approved by Council.
parking meter means an apparatus designed to receive payment of fees for parking; indicate whether any fee for parking has been paid; fix the period of parking allowed for any fee paid; and indicate whether the period for which any such fee has been paid has elapsed.
parking meter area means any portion of a public place which is authorised by resolution of Council to be used as a parking place, and at which parking meters are installed and maintained as created under clause 5.
parking place means a place (including a building whether used partly or exclusively for the parking of vehicles) where vehicles, or any class of vehicles, may park including all necessary approaches and means of entrance to and egress from any such place.
parking receipt means a receipt produced by a pay and display parking meter indicating the payment of a fee for parking and the end of the period allowed for parking as fixed by the meter.
parking space means any part of a public place reserved and identified for the parking of vehicles.
parking warden means a parking warden appointed under Section 7 of the Transport Act 1962.
passenger service vehicle has the same meaning as in the Transport Services Licensing Act 1989.
pay means:
a) Inserting into a pay and display parking meter New Zealand currency sufficient to pay the parking fee payable for the period during which the vehicle is to be parked in a pay and display parking meter area, and then immediately;
b) Pushing the green “OK” button on the pay and display parking meter – provided that if the meter is malfunctioning then the red “Cancel” button should instead be pushed and payment made at another meter;
c) Or such other payment procedures as may be declared by Council by resolution in relation to specific types of parking meter.
pay and display parking meter means an apparatus designed to receive payment of fees for parking (in accordance with the procedure outlined in the definition of “pay” in this Part or the other payment procedures referred to in that definition), fix the period of parking allowed for any fee paid, and issue parking receipts or activate an electronic in-car display device indicating the payment of a fee for parking and the expiry time at the end of the period allowed for parking as fixed by the meter.
pay and display parking meter area means any portion of a public place which is authorised by resolution of Council to be used as a parking place and at which pay and display parking meters are installed as created under clause 6.
public holiday has the same meaning as in the Holidays Act 2003.
public place means a public place owned by or under the control of Council and includes any road.
public work means every activity which the Crown or Council (or their agents) are authorised to engage in and includes any investigation, enquiry, meeting or item required directly or indirectly for such activity.
reserved parking space means any parking space which has been reserved by Council for letting to any person for reserved parking and which is clearly marked by a sign, road marking, notice or number or otherwise as being not available for public parking.
road has the same meaning as in the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
shared path means a cycle path, a cycle track, a footpath, or some other kind of path that may be used by some or all of the following persons at the same time – (a) cyclists; (b) pedestrians; (c) riders of mobility devices; and (d) riders of wheeled recreational devices.
shared zone means a length of roadway intended to be used by pedestrians and vehicles (including cyclists).
shipping container means a standardised rectangular box or a similar container, used to transport freight by ship, rail and highway.
skip bin means a bin or similar receptacle used for the removal of waste.
special vehicle lane has the same meaning as the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
storage charges are a fee as specified from time to time in the Land Transport Act 1998 or in Regulations or Notices made pursuant to that Act.
structure means something made up or constructed of a number of parts that are held or put together in a particular way.
towage fee is a fee as specified from time to time in the Land Transport Act 1998 or in Regulations or Notices made pursuant to that Act.
vehicle has the same meaning as in the Land Transport Act 1998 and includes motor vehicles and heavy motor vehicles.
verge includes every verge, flowerbed, grass verge or plot, shrubbery or planted area which is laid out to not form part of the road carriageway.
3.2 Words implying the singular include the plural and vice versa.
3.3 Headings and bolding are only for convenience and may be ignored.
3.4 Resolutions of Council may be amended, rescinded or reinstated by a further resolution of Council.
The latest resolution of Council shall be deemed to be the operative resolution.
Part 2 General Scope
4 Parking on roads 4.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or
markings, may: 4.1.1 Limit, restrict or prohibit the parking or stopping of vehicles on any part of any public place. 4.1.2 Permit the parking or stopping on any part of any public place of a particular class or classes of
vehicles on such basis as may be designated.
Part 3 Metered parking
5 Creation of parking meter areas
5.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or
markings, may: 5.1.1 Declare any part of a public place to be a parking meter area. 5.1.2 Declare the number and position of metered spaces within a parking meter area. 5.1.3 Declare the times and for how long vehicles may park in metered spaces. 5.1.4 Fix the fees payable for the parking of vehicles within metered spaces in parking meter areas. 5.1.5 Declare the mechanism for collecting fees and managing parking meter areas.
5.2 In accordance with any resolution under clause 5.1 Council shall mark out metered spaces in parking meter areas and install a parking meter for each space.
6 Creation of pay and display parking meter areas
6.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or markings, may: 6.1.1 Declare any part of a public place to be a pay and display parking meter area. 6.1.2 Declare the number and position of metered spaces within a pay and display parking meter
6.1.3 Declare the times and for how long vehicles may park in metered spaces. 6.1.4 Fix the fees payable for the parking of vehicles within metered spaces in pay and display
parking meter areas. 6.1.5 Declare the mechanism for collecting fees and managing pay and display meter areas.
6.2 In accordance with any resolution under clause 6.1 Council shall mark out metered spaces and provide pay and display parking meter/s with or without barrier arms in pay and display parking meter areas.
7 When parking in metered spaces applies
7.1 Any resolution by Council will apply to metered spaces:
7.1.1 Every day of the week except Sundays and public holidays; and 7.1.2 Between the hours of 8.00am and 10.00pm on those days
except where signs relating to those metered spaces indicate otherwise. 8 Parking in metered spaces
8.1 No vehicle shall be parked in a metered space other than completely within the lines defining that
space.
8.2 Any vehicle may be lawfully parked in a metered space during the period which has been paid for.
8.3 No person shall park, or allow to be parked, any vehicle in any metered space in excess of the maximum time allowed for parking in that space. Unless the maximum authorised time is exceeded, it shall be lawful for the driver or person in charge of any vehicle, on the expiration of any authorised period of parking, to deposit or cause to be deposited the prescribed fee in the parking meter or the pay and display parking meter and occupy the metered space for the further period indicated by the parking meter or the parking receipt.
8.4 No vehicle shall be parked in a metered space which is already occupied by another vehicle, provided however that it shall be lawful for more than one motorcycle to occupy any metered space at the same time.
8.5 Where more than one motorcycle occupies a metered space only one parking fee shall be required. However no motorcycle shall remain parked in the metered space while the parking meter shows that the time has expired or the period authorised by the parking receipt has expired.
8.6 Subject to clause 8.7, if the metered space is parallel to the kerb or footpath, the driver of any vehicle (except a motorcycle) shall park the vehicle so that it is headed in the general direction of the movement of traffic on the side of the street on which it is parked.
8.7 A motorcycle may be parked otherwise parallel to the kerb or footpath provided that during the hours of darkness it shall be sufficiently illuminated so as to be visible from at least 50 metres.
8.8 If a metered space is at an angle (other than 90˚ to the kerb or footpath) the driver of any vehicle (except a motorcycle) occupying such space shall park the vehicle in such a manner that it is headed substantially in the general direction of the legal flow of traffic on the side of the street on which such vehicle is parked.
8.9 If a metered space is at an angle, the front of any vehicle parked in such space shall be facing in towards the kerb or footpath.
8.10 No person shall park or allow to be parked any vehicle in any metered space except as permitted by the provisions of this part of this Bylaw, or operate or attempt to operate any parking meter or pay and display parking meter by means other than as prescribed by this Bylaw.
8.11 A vehicle may be parked at a metered space without depositing the prescribed fee if a permit issued by Council giving such exemption is displayed on its windscreen.
9 Payment of fees – parking meter areas
9.1 As soon as any vehicle parks in a metered space in a parking meter area, the driver of the vehicle
shall immediately deposit or cause to be deposited in the parking meter provided at the metered space the prescribed fee indicated on the meter. Any vehicle may be lawfully parked in a metered space in a parking meter area during the period which has been paid for.
9.2 No person shall park, or allow to be parked, any vehicle in any metered space in excess of the maximum time allowed for parking in that metered space. It shall be lawful for the driver or person in charge of any vehicle, on the expiration of any authorised period of parking, to deposit or cause to be deposited the prescribed fee in the parking meter and occupy the metered space for the further period indicated by the meter, provided that the maximum time allowed is not exceeded.
10 Payment of fees – pay and display parking meter areas
10.1 As soon as any vehicle parks in a metered space in a pay and display parking meter area, the driver of
the vehicle shall immediately pay the prescribed fee indicated on the pay and display parking meter.
10.2 The parking receipt issued by the pay and display parking meter shall be displayed on the inner side of the windscreen, or in the case of a vehicle not fitted with a windscreen in some other conspicuous position, but in all cases in a position which is easily visible by a parking warden.
10.3 For the purposes of clause 10.2 a parking receipt shall not be valid if: 10.3.1 The parking receipt is so torn, defaced or mutilated that the figures or other particulars
thereon are not legible; or 10.3.2 The period of validity of the parking receipt has expired; or 10.3.3 Where applicable, the date and time of commencement of parking the vehicle is not
indicated on the parking receipt in accordance with the instructions printed on the parking receipt.
11 Temporary discontinuance of a metered space
11.1 Council may temporarily discontinue, by way of a meter hood, the use of any metered space. No
unauthorised person may then stand or park a vehicle in that space.
11.2 Council may temporarily discontinue a parking place if a sign or signs indicating “No Standing or No Parking” are displayed. No person may then stand or park a vehicle there while the sign or signs are displayed.
11.3 Council may, upon receipt of a Temporary Traffic Management Plan, allocate either metered and/or restricted parking for the exclusive use of that event or activity, for the duration of the Temporary Traffic Management Plan.
12.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the erection of the appropriate signs, or placement of markings,
may: 12.1.1 Declare any public place to be a parking place. 12.1.2 Specify the vehicles which shall be permitted to park there. 12.1.3 State the days and hours within which parking shall be permitted there. 12.1.4 State the conditions of parking in a parking place. 12.1.5 Fix which part or parts of the parking place shall be available for public use and which part or
parts may be available for reserved parking. 12.1.6 Fix the prescribed fees and/or rentals
12.2 It shall be unlawful for a driver or person in charge of a vehicle leaving a parking space to return to
that parking space or any parking space within the same parking place until a period of 30 minutes elapses from the time the vehicle has left the particular parking space to when it returns.
12.3 Mobility Concession. 12.3.1 A mobility cardholder may park for double the prescribed time limit by showing a mobility
card. The parking fee shall only be payable for the first half of the parking duration. 13 Creation of coupon parking areas
13.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or
markings, may: 13.1.1 Declare any part of a public place to be a coupon parking area. 13.1.2 Declare the number and position of parking spaces within a coupon parking area. 13.1.3 Declare the times and for how long vehicles may park in parking spaces in a coupon parking
area. 13.1.4 Fix the fees payable for the parking of vehicles within parking spaces in coupon parking areas. 13.1.5 Declare the mechanism for collecting fees and managing coupon parking areas.
13.2 In accordance with any resolution under clause 13.1 Council shall mark out parking spaces in coupon parking areas.
14 Parking in coupon parking areas
14.1 No person shall park a vehicle in a parking space in any coupon parking area at any time when
parking by coupon applies unless there is displayed on the inner side of the windscreen, or in the case of a vehicle not fitted with a windscreen, in some other conspicuous position, one or more valid coupons sufficient to cover the entire period during which the motor vehicle is parked.
14.2 No vehicle shall remain parked in a parking space in any coupon parking area in excess of the authorised time.
14.3 For the purposes of clause 14.1 a parking coupon shall not be valid if: 14.3.1 The coupon is so torn, defaced or mutilated that the figures or other particulars thereon are
not legible; or 14.3.2 The period of validity of the coupon has expired; or 14.3.3 Where applicable the date and time of commencement of parking the vehicle is not indicated
on the coupon in accordance with the instructions printed on the coupon.
Miscellaneous 15 Creation of special vehicle lanes
15.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or
markings, may declare any part of a road to be a special vehicle lane. 16 Parking of heavy motor vehicles
16.1 No person shall stop, stand or park a heavy motor vehicle for a period of more than one hour in any
public place where there is adjacent residential zoned land on either side of the road, provided however that it shall not be an offence to stop, stand or park such vehicle for such period as is reasonably required for the purpose of loading or unloading that vehicle in the course of trade.
17 Creation of loading zones
17.1 Council by resolution may, subject to the placement of appropriate signage:
17.1.1 Declare any part of a public place to be a loading zone. 17.1.2 Declare the times and for how long vehicles may park in the loading zone.
18 Towaway
18.1 Any enforcement officer or authorised officer may have a vehicle moved or removed to some other
position, including any appropriate premises designated by Council or the Police, if the vehicle: 18.1.1 Is left unattended in any public place so as to cause a nuisance or obstruction; or 18.1.2 Fails to comply with the permitted use of the parking space.
18.2 Where any vehicle has been removed pursuant to clause 18.1 the owner or driver of that vehicle may
be required to pay any or all of the following: 18.2.1 Any fine that may be imposed; and/or 18.2.2 A towage fee for the removal of the vehicle; and/or 18.2.3 Reasonable storage charges on a daily basis until the vehicle is uplifted.
19 Skip bins
19.1 No person shall place or cause to be placed skip bins on the road without the prior written consent of Council. Such consent may at any time be varied or revoked in writing by Council. The skip bin must also comply with the following: 19.1.1 The edge of the bin facing on-coming traffic must be a white or a fluorescent colour which is
in contrast to the colour of the main body of the bin; and 19.1.2 The bin must be placed at least 1.0 m away from a traffic lane; and 19.1.3 The bin must be contained within an area on the road that has been fenced off with
appropriate safety fencing.
19.2 No person shall place or cause to be placed skip bins in metered spaces without the prior written consent of Council. Such consent may at any time be varied or revoked in writing by Council.
19.3 In addition to receiving written consent from Council, any skip bin placed in a metered space must: 19.3.1 Have a meter hood issued for the parking space which shall be attached to the meter
controlling the metered space being used; and 19.3.2 Be contained wholly within the parking space.
19.4 No skip bin shall be left on any road between half an hour after sunset of one day and half an hour before sunrise the following day unless properly lit by flashing amber lights on outer corners of the bin facing on-coming traffic.
19.5 Where any skip bin is placed on the road other than in accordance with clauses 19.1 to 19.4, such skip bin may be removed by Council.
19.6 Where any skip bin has been removed pursuant to clause 19.5, the owner or hirer of that bin may be required to pay any or all of the following: 19.6.1 Any fine that may be imposed; and/or 19.6.2 A towage fee for the removal of the bin; and/or 19.6.3 Reasonable storage charges on a daily basis until the bin is uplifted.
20 Shipping containers or other structures on roads
20.1 No person shall place or cause to be placed a shipping container or other structure/s on any road without the prior written consent of Council. Such consent may at any time be varied or revoked in writing by Council.
20.2 In addition to receiving written consent from Council any shipping container or other structure on a road shall also comply with the following: 20.2.1 The edge of the container or structure facing on-coming traffic must be a white or a
fluorescent colour which is in contrast to the colour of the main body of the container or structure; and
20.2.2 The container or structure must be placed at least 1.0 m away from a traffic lane; and 20.2.3 The container or structure must be contained within an area on the road that has been
fenced off with appropriate safety fencing.
20.3 No shipping container or other structure shall be left on any road between half an hour after sunset of one day and half an hour before sunrise the following day unless properly lit by flashing amber lights on outer corners of the bin facing on-coming traffic.
20.4 Where any shipping container or structure is placed on the road other than in accordance with clauses 20.1 to 20.3 such shipping container or structure may be removed by Council.
20.5 Where any shipping container or structure has been removed pursuant to clause 20.4, the owner or hirer of such container or structure may be required to pay any or all of the following: 20.5.1 Any fine that may be imposed; and/or 20.5.2 A towage fee for the removal of the container or structure; and/or 20.5.3 Reasonable storage charges on a daily basis until the container or structure is uplifted.
21 Caravans / camper vehicles
21.1 No person shall stop, stand or park any caravan, camper vehicle, house bus or mobile home on any road for any continuous period exceeding seven days without the prior written consent of Council.
21.2 No person is permitted to use a caravan, camper vehicle, house bus or mobile home parked in accordance with clause 21.1 as a place of sleeping accommodation.
22 Displaying vehicles on street
22.1 No person shall use any public place for the keeping, placing or parking of any vehicle whether for
sale, exhibition, demonstration, advertisement, signage or storage, except where from time to time Council may determine by resolution an area set aside for that purpose.
23.1 No person shall operate any crane, mobile crane, concrete pump truck, concrete truck, excavator or
drill rig without the prior written consent of Council while parked or stopped on a road. Conditions may be imposed in granting such consent.
24 Vehicle repairs
24.1 No person shall park any vehicle on any road to carry out repairs unless those repairs are of both a
minor and urgent nature. 25 Misuse of mobility concession cards
25.1 It shall be unlawful for the person who is the registered holder of a mobility card displayed not to be
the driver of or a passenger in the vehicle displaying the mobility card. 26 Bus stops
26.1 Council by resolution, and subject to the placing and maintenance of the appropriate signs or
markings, may: 26.1.1 Declare any part of a public place to be a bus stop or stand for passenger service vehicles; 26.1.2 Direct what type of passenger service vehicles may use any such bus stop or stand; 26.1.3 Define restrictions, stopping times, or change the type of passenger service vehicles that may
use any such bus stop or stand.
26.2 Unless otherwise indicated by appropriate signage no passenger service vehicle shall remain stopped on a bus stop for any longer period than is necessary to pick up or set down passengers.
27 Leaving objects of roads
27.1 No person may place or leave objects on roads without reasonable excuse in circumstances that
disregard the safety of other road users. 28 Window washers
28.1 No person may wash or clean the windows or attempt to wash or clean the windows of any vehicle
or any part thereof in any public place in a manner that may be unsafe or intimidate or cause a nuisance to any person, or cause an obstruction to traffic.
29 Vehicle and road use
29.1 Council may by resolution:
29.1.1 Require vehicles on roads to travel in one specified direction only (one way); or 29.1.2 Prohibit vehicles turning from facing or travelling in one direction to facing or travelling in the
opposite direction (perfoming a U-turn) on specified roads. 30 Shared paths
30.1 Council may by resolution –
30.1.1 Determine the length, route and/or location of a shared path; and
30.1.2 Determine priority for users on a shared path.
30.2 No person may use a shared path in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the Council under this clause.
31 Shared zones
31.1 Council may by resolution specify any road or part of a road to be a shared zone.
31.2 Any resolution made under this clause may specify:
31.2.1 Whether the shared zone may be used by specified classes of vehicles;
31.2.2 The days and hours of operation of the shared zone (if they differ from 24 hours per day, 7
days per week); and
31.2.3 Any other restrictions on how the shared zone is to be used by the public, including how traffic and pedestrians will interact.
31.3 Except where the Council has by resolution specified otherwise, no person may stand or park a
vehicle in a road or part of a road specified as a shared zone.
31.4 No person may use a shared zone in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the Council under this clause.
30 Exemptions
30.1 The provisions of this Bylaw shall not apply to any vehicle parked, stopped or diverted by the
direction of any authorised officer, enforcement officer or traffic control sign.
30.2 The provisions of this Bylaw shall not apply to any motor vehicle engaged on Council or other public work at that place where: 30.2.1 No other practicable alternative is available; and 30.2.2 The vehicle is being used with due consideration for other road users; and 30.2.3 The act which would otherwise be a breach of this part of this Bylaw is reasonably necessary
for the purposes of the work. 31 Fees and charges
31.1 Council reserves the right to determine, by resolution, following the special consultative procedure
provided for in the Local Government Act 2002, reasonable fees and charges for undertaking any inspection in terms of discharging its responsibilities under and in terms of this Bylaw.
32.1 Every person commits an offence against this Bylaw who:
32.1.1 Causes or permits a vehicle to: 32.1.1.1 Straddle any lines defining a metered space; or 32.1.1.2 Encroach on more than one metered space unless his or her vehicle is of too great
a length to be accommodated in one space. The person in charge of the vehicle requiring more than one metered space shall be liable for the parking fee in respect of each metered space encroached upon.
32.1.2 Parks any vehicle, which by reason of its condition or content causes an offensive odour in any public place.
32.1.3 Stops or parks, or permits the stopping or parking, of any vehicle on any footpath or verge. 32.1.4 Is in charge of any vehicle and fails to display a parking receipt as required by this Bylaw or
allows any vehicle to remain in the metered space for any period in excess of that for which a parking receipt was issued.
32.1.5 Operates or attempts to operate any parking receipt dispenser or barrier arm by any means other than as prescribed by the particular apparatus and/or by this Bylaw.
32.1.6 Parks a vehicle in a parking place during the time it is reserved by Council for some other person or is not permitted to be used at that time by any vehicle.
32.1.7 Leaves a vehicle in a parking space except entirely within any lines defining a parking space. 32.1.8 Parks in a parking space a vehicle that is not of the class or classes permitted to use that
parking space. 32.1.9 Wilfully or negligently obstructs any parking space. 32.1.10 Unloads any vehicle so as to cause or, be likely to cause, damage to the pavement or any
footpath. 32.1.11 Misuses any parking meter or pay and display parking meter. 32.1.12 Interferes, tampers, or attempts to tamper with the working or operation of any parking
meter or pay and display parking meter. 32.1.13 Without prior written consent of Council affixes or attempts to affix any placard,
advertisement, notice list, document board or thing, or to paint, write upon or disfigure any parking meter or pay and display parking meter.
32.1.14 Commits, or causes to be committed, any act contrary to this Bylaw. 32.1.15 Omits, or knowingly permits to remain undone, any act required by this Bylaw. 32.1.16 Refuses or neglects to comply with any authorisation or any condition in any such
authorisation, whether public or private, given pursuant to this Bylaw, or 32.1.17 Obstructs or hinders any authorised officer or enforcement officer in the performance of any
power, or duty conferred upon him or her by this Bylaw. 32.1.18 Being the driver or person in charge of a vehicle, returns to the same parking space within
the same parking place, within a period of less than 30 minutes from the time the vehicle left the particular parking space.
33 Penalty
33.1 Every person who commits a breach of this Bylaw is liable on summary conviction to a fine not
THE COMMON SEAL of the ROTORUA DISTRICT COUNCIL was hereto affixed in the presence of: ...................................................... MAYOR ...................................................... CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Statement of Proposal Background The Rotorua Lakes Council has 15 bylaws. These are rules made by the Council that affect and regulate certain activities in the community. They cover health, safety and a range of environmental issues. Every few years the Council is required by the Local Government Act 2002 (‘LGA 2002’) to review its bylaws. The Council has undertaken a recent review and is proposing two amendments to the Traffic Bylaw 2015 as set out in this Statement of Proposal. Consultation Process - How can I have my say? The Council must use the special consultative procedure when amending a bylaw. Section 83(1)(a) of LGA 2002 requires the Council to prepare a Statement of Proposal. Section 86(2) requires the Statement of Proposal to include: a draft of the bylaw as proposed to be amended and the reasons for the proposal; and a report on the relevant determinations by the Council under section 155 of the LGA 2002. Submissions are welcomed on the proposed bylaw changes. You can submit your opinions online via an electronic submission form on the Council website. You may post or fax submissions to the Council. You also need to indicate whether you wish to appear in person before the Council to speak in support of your submission. To get your submission to us, either: Email to: [email protected] Fax: 07 346 3143 Visit our website: http://letstalk.rotorualakescouncil.nz/ Post to: Rotorua Lakes Council, Private Bag 3029, Rotorua Mail Centre, Rotorua 3046 The submission period runs from 23 November 2017 to 15 January 2018. Submissions on the Bylaw and the proposed amendment are available to the public and the media. This includes your personal information. All submissions will be acknowledged. Submitters who wish to speak to their submission will be advised of the Council meeting date following the closure of submissions.
For further information on the Bylaw, please phone the Council on 07 348 4199 or email us at [email protected]
Relevant Legislation The Council is able to amend bylaws under the LGA 2002. Section 160 of the LGA 2002 requires that the Council must amend a bylaw by making the determinations required by section 155. Section 155(1) of the LGA 2002 requires, before commencing the process for amending a bylaw, a determination as to whether the amendment is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. Section 155(2) of the LGA 2002 states that, if it is determined that the amendment is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem, it must be determined, before making the amendment, whether the proposed amendment is in the most appropriate form. Section 155(3) of the LGA 2002 requires that no amendment may be made which is inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, notwithstanding section 5 of that Act. In addition, when a Council amends a bylaw, it needs to take into account the general law that applies to bylaws as set out in the Bylaws Act 1910. There are four general requirements for making an amendment to a valid bylaw. These are: an Act of Parliament must empower the Council to make the amendment (authority); the amendment must not be repugnant to the general laws of New Zealand (repugnancy); the amendment must be certain (certainty); and the amendment must be reasonable (reasonableness). Although an amendment to a bylaw cannot be inconsistent with existing statutory provisions, provided it remains within the scope of the statutory power authorising the Council to make the amendment, it can bring together in one document a range of powers, duties, and prohibitions that are otherwise scattered throughout various statutes. A bylaw can provide residents with easy access to a comprehensive account of their duties and the Council with a cost effective enforcement mechanism to deal with the large number of complaints it receives as a result of a nuisance on private land. In addition, every decision of a local authority must be made in accordance within the provisions of sections 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 and 82 of the LGA 2002. Section 77 requires the Council to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision, and to assess those options by considering a number of matters set out in section 77(1)(b). These matters include: the costs and benefits of each option in terms of the present and future interests of the district; and the extent to which each option would promote or achieve community outcomes in an integrated and efficient manner; and the impact of each option on the Council’s capacity to meet present and future needs in relation to any statutory responsibility; and any other matters, that in the opinion of the Council are relevant. Section 78 sets out the requirement to consider the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or to have an interest in, a matter. Section 79 whilst giving the Council discretion about how best to achieve compliance with sections 77 and 78 requires the Council to consider the significance of all relevant matters, including those set out in section 14 of the Act.
The Urban Cycleways Programme began in 2014 with the aim of making significant improvements to cycling infrastructure in New Zealand’s main urban areas. In Rotorua, a city-wide network of cycleways is being established which will connect suburbs and main arterial routes to the CBD, some major tourist attractions and to the Whakarewarewa Forest / Redwoods area. Many of the cycleways allow for shared use by cyclists and pedestrians.
To better regulate the cycleways for shared use by cyclists and pedestrians, officers propose to establish a power similar to that adopted by other Councils5 to establish and regulate the use of shared paths under a bylaw.
Rather than amending the General Bylaw 2011 to include provisions concerning shared paths, officers recommend that the Rotorua District Traffic Bylaw 2015 be amended to include these provisions, as follows: Amend the definitions clause of the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following definition of “shared path”:
Shared path means a cycle path, a cycle track, a footpath, or some other kind of path that may be used by some or all of the following persons at the same time – (a) cyclists; (b) pedestrians; (c) riders of mobility devices; and (d) riders of wheeled recreational devices.
Amend the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following provisions as new clause 30 and renumbering the remaining clauses of the bylaw:
30 Shared paths 30.1 Council may by resolution – 30.1.1 Determine the length, route and/or location of a shared path; and 30.1.2 Determine priority for users on a shared path. 30.2 No person may use a shared path in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the Council under this clause.
Shared Zones
Shared zones aim to remove the segregation of road users so that pedestrians also share the roadway and, as such, no formal footpaths are required. The concept relies on the removal of typical street elements including line-markings, signage and kerbs, with the addition of extra street furniture such as seats, cycle parking and landscaping. This results in an intentional level of ambiguity so that drivers proceed with caution and at slow speeds. People cycling and driving in shared zones are expected to travel in a way that is consistent with a walking pace, and are legally required to give way to pedestrians.
The Council is considering establishing ‘shared zones’ in areas of the CBD. To better provide for shared zones, officers propose to establish a power similar to that adopted by other Councils6 to establish and regulate the use of shared zones under a bylaw.
Rather than amending the General Bylaw 2011 to include provisions concerning shared zones, officers recommend that the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 be amended to include provisions concerning shared paths, as follows: Amend the definitions clause of Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following definition of “shared zone”:
Shared zone means a length of roadway intended to be used by pedestrians and vehicles (including cyclists).
5 See the proposed Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017. 6 See the proposed Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017.
Amend the Rotorua District Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 by inserting the following provisions as new clause 31 and renumbering the remaining clauses of the bylaw:
31 Shared zones 31.1 Council may by resolution specify any road or part of a road to be a shared zone. 31.2 Any resolution made under this clause may specify:
31.2.1 Whether the shared zone may be used by specified classes of vehicles;
31.2.2 The days and hours of operation of the shared zone (if they differ from 24 hours per day, 7 days per week); and
31.2.3 Any other restrictions on how the shared zone is to be used by the public, including how traffic and pedestrians will interact.
31.3 Except where the Council has by resolution specified otherwise, no person may stand or park a vehicle in a road or part of a
road specified as a shared zone. 31.4 No person may use a shared zone in a manner that contravenes a restriction made by the Council under this clause.
Conclusions Submissions are welcomed on the proposed bylaw change. You can submit your opinions online via an electronic submission form on the Council website. You may post or fax submissions to the Council. You also need to indicate whether you wish to appear in person before the Council to speak in support of your submission. To get your submission to us, either: Email to: [email protected] Fax: 07 346 3143 Visit our website: http://letstalk.rotorualakescouncil.nz/ Post to: Rotorua Lakes Council, Private Bag 3029, Rotorua Mail Centre, Rotorua 3046 The submission period runs from 23 November 2017 to 15 January 2018.
Mayor Chairperson and Members STRATEGY, POLICY & FINANCE COMMITEE SPEED LIMIT BYLAW – CHANGES TO SPEED LIMITS Report prepared by: Darryl Robson, Transport Operations Manager Report reviewed by: Stavros Michael, General Manager Infrastructure Report approved by: Geoff Williams, Chief Executive
1. PURPOSE The purpose of the report is to request that the committee agrees the proposed changes to speed limits on local roads in the Rotorua District and to refer these for public consultation.
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The responsibility for setting of speed limits rests with the Road Controlling Authority, which it is the relevant Territorial Authority or NZTA in the case of State Highways. Speed limits are set under Council’s ‘Speed Limit Bylaw’. However speed limits and speed limit settings are required to comply with the Land Transport Rule ‘Setting of Speed Limits 2017’, which was recently signed into law. Proposed speed limits therefore have been assessed under this new rule. The assessment is undertaken in accordance with the ‘Speed Management Guidelines’, published by NZTA. Failure to establish that proposed speed limits are in accordance with the rule may invalidate them. Council reviews speed limits on approximately a three year cycle and reviews those roads that have been subject to public submissions, principally through Annual Plans, roads where changes have occurred e.g. development or for some other specific reason e.g. recommendation from a Coroner’s report. As the review is under the By-law the process required to review speed limits is undertaken in accordance with the ‘Special Consultative Provisions of the Local Government Act’.
3. RECOMMENDATION 2: 1. That the report ‘Speed Limit By-Law – Changes to Speed Limits’ be received.
2. That the Committee recommends to Council that changes to speed limits on the following road are consulted on in accordance with the requirements of the rule “Setting of Speed Limits 2017”.
Manawahae Road SH30 to Pongakawa Valley Road 100km/hr 80km/hr
Pongakawa Valley Road Manawahae Rd to Kennedy By 100km/hr 80km/hr
Pongakawa Valley Road Kennedy Bay to Otatau Bay 100km/hr 80km/hr
Western Road SH5 to Brake Road No 22 to Brake Road
100km/hr 70km/hr
60km/hr 50km/hr
Brake Road Full length 70km/hr 60km/hr
Oakland Place Full length 70km/hr 50km/hr
Pioneer Road Full length 70km/hr 50km/hr
Mohi Crescent Full length 70km/hr 50km/hr
Tarawera Road Forest Place to Landing 100km/hr 80km/hr
Spencer Road Current 100km/hr sections 100km/hr 80km/hr
Brunswick Drive (including side roads)
SH30 to end 70km/hr 50km/hr
Okareka Loop Road Blue Lake to Okareka Village And Tarawera Road to Village
100km/hr 80km/hr
Millar Road Steep Street to end 100km/hr 80km/hr
Waiotapu Loop Road SH5 to SH5 100km/hr 60km/hr
Road to Wastewater Treatment Plant (Unnamed)
SH30A to WWTP 70km/hr 40km/hr
Vaughan Road Puketawhero Park to Duggan Drive 70km/hr 50km/hr
Owhata Road Last house to Iri Irikapua Parade 70km/hr 30km/hr
Hamurana Road SH36 to SH33 Varies 70km/hr to 100km/hr
70km/hr
Kaska Road Full length 80km/hr 70km/hr
Turner Road Full length 100km/hr 70km/hr
Te Waerenga Road 0m to 350m 100km/hr 70km/hr
Paradise Valley, Endean Te Miri and Te Manu roads
Full length 100km/hr 80km/hr
4. BACKGROUND The new rule ‘Setting of Speed Limits 2017’ is part of the Government’s Safer Journeys Strategy which is aimed at reducing the number and severity of crashes on NZ roads. The new rule allows for greater flexibility in setting of speed limits and in particular allows for the posting of limits that are in line with the actual speeds. RLC has assessed each road considered for review under the new rule. The considerations taken into account to assess recommended speeds include:
One network road classification – function of road. There is still a requirement to ‘engineer’ speed down to posted limits should actual speeds exceed a posted limit. There is a degree of flexibility though should actual speed be higher on short sections of a road. The review has taken this ‘common sense’ approach. The review has also sought to minimise frequent changes to speed limits, again to have a ‘common sense’ approach and some of the recommendations include adjacent roads not specifically assessed to avoid confusing and frequent changes. This is covered in the rule under themes whereby consistency is considered to be appropriate.
5. DISCUSSION AND OPTIONS In reviewing speed limits on the roads under consideration, the following factors have been evaluated:
Functional Classification – ONRC hierarchy.
Speed evaluated in accordance with guidelines.
Actual measured speeds.
Any requirement for engineered intervention.
Impact and consistency with wider network. There are other considerations that are also important to consider.
Consideration Minimum length of limits 50 & 60km/hr 80km/hr 100km/hr Intermediate Limits 70 and 90km/hr
Requirements 500m 800m 2000m Require specific NZTA approval
In recommending speed limits minimum lengths have been considered and where appropriate on adjacent roads existing limits recommended for change. Also the intermediate limits have been avoided if practical so that specific NZTA approval is not required. Summary of Recommended Changes
Road Location Current speed limit (km/hr)
Assessed Speed Limit (Km/hr)
Actual Speed (Km/hr)
Proposed Speed Limit (km/hr
Comment
Manawahe Road
SH30 to Pongakawa Valley Road
100 80 63 80 Compliant with safe operating speed.
Pongakawa Valley Road
Manawahae Rd to Kennedy Bay
100 80 73
80 Compliant with safe operating speed. 85th percentile speed
100 65 80 Short section of road that does not comply with 100km/hr limit and keeps consistency with proposed speed limit on first section of Pongakawa Valley Road.
Western Road
SH5 to Brake Road (include Brake Rd) Brake Road to 22 Western Road.
100 70
50
56 60 50
Short section currently 100km/hr does not comply with new rule Development along Road now justifies 50km/hr limit
Tarawera Road
Forest Place to Landing
100 80 70 (Buried Village) 73 (transfer Stn)
80 Include Spencer Rd (Tarawera Rd to Settlement) and 301 Spencer to 441 Spencer as both sections currently at 100km/hr do not comply with 2km minimum distance. 85th percentile 90km/hr (Transfer Station)
Brunswick Drive
SH30 to end 70 60 57 and 55
50 Include all side roads for consistency. 85th percentile 67km/hr
Okareka Loop Road
Blue Lake to Okareka Village
100 82 and 66
80 Include first section of Okareka Loop Road on other side of village for consistency. 85th percentile 78km/hr
Millar Road Steep Street to end
100 80 72 80 Provides consistency with all roads in Okareka. 85th percentile 85km/hr
Waiotapu Loop Road
SH5 to SH5 100 60 39 (north) 47 (south)
60 NZTA looking at reducing speed limit on this section of SH5 and this will provide consistency. 85th percentile 48 and
70 50 50 Development along this section of Vaughan Road justifies 50km/hr limit.
Owhata Road
Last house to Iri Irikapua Parade
70 30 Extension of 30km/hr limit around into Owhata Road (60m) which currently changes at Iri Irikapua Parade.
Hamurana Road
SH36 to SH33 Varies 70 to 100
74 (70 limit) 79 (100 limit)
70 Proposed speed limit of 70km/hr including all side roads except as noted below. This will provide for consistent speed limit throughout area. 85th percentile 94km/hr (current 100km/hr zone)
Unsworth and Ward
50 50 No change
Kaska Road 80 70 For consistency
Turner Road 100 70 For consistency
Te Waerenga Road
0m to 350m 100 70 For consistency
Paradise Valley Road
Clayton Road to SH5
100 61 (stock car club)
80 Include Endean Te Miri and Te Manu Roads. 85th percentile 73km/hr
Note that the actual speed given are average speeds measured over a day in daytime hours only. 85th percentile speed is the actual speed that 15% of vehicles are currently exceeding. Some sites have more than one actual measurement at different locations. The above proposals are in line with the speed management guide or in line with actual measured speeds. The recommendation for Hamurana Road is to have a consistent speed limit with the area. This is not strictly in accordance with the guide that assesses part of the route (Marama Point to SH33) and (within the Hamurana urban areas) as 60km/hr and the rural sections at 80km/hr respectively. This would be an alternative recommendation. Note that a proposed 70km/hr limit will require specific approval of NZTA, prior to any wider consultation. Note that this route currently has a number of sections with various limits 60km/hr, 80km/hr and 100km/hr.
Rationale for each site is given in the table below.
Site Rationale Particular requirements
Manawhae and Pongakawa Valley roads
Actual speeds are lower than current posted limits due to relatively narrow winding road.
No intervention measures required.
Western Road Relocation of 50km/hr limit to match development. Reduce remaining section to match actual speeds.
Threshold signage required for motorists entering from SH 5 to induce compliance
Tarawera and Spencer Roads Proposed speed limit to match actual speed and provide consistent limits.
Some sections will require threshold type signage to induce compliance
Brunswick Drive and side Roads Proposed speed limit to more closely match actual speed and provide consistent limits.
Recommendation is lower than assessed speed and actual speeds so will require treatment.
Okeraka Loop and Millar Roads Proposed speed limit to match actual speed and provide consistent limits
No additional site requirements
Waiotapu Loop Road Proposed speed limit to match actual speed and provide consistent limits
No additional site requirements
Road to Wastewater Treatment Plant
Safe and appropriate speed for environment
No additional site requirements
Vaughan Road Relocation of 50km/hr limit to match development.
No additional site requirements
Owhata Road Posting of 30km/hr limit for Iri Irikapua Parade prior to corner
No additional site requirements
Hamurana Road Proposed speed limit to match actual speed and provide consistent limits.
Some sections will require threshold type signage to induce compliance
Threshold type signage is large signage eg. Tarawera Road aimed at inducing compliance with speed limits where there is a tendency to travel faster. After implementation of new speed limits sites will be checked for compliance and if necessary some additional measures fitted into existing programmes to ensure compliance within reasonable limits.
6. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE The decisions or matters of this report are not considered significant in accordance with the council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
7. COMMUNITY INPUT/ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLICITY The Speed Limit setting rule specifically requires engagement with the following:
a) Any adjacent Road Controlling or Territorial Authorities that are affected. b) Local communities considered to be affected. c) The Commissioner – Ministry of Transport. d) The Chief Executive of the New Zealand Automobile Association. e) NZTA
f) Any other organisation or user group that is considered to be affected. In setting of speed limits Council must take into account the views of the above through both written and verbal submissions to Council.
8. CONSIDERATIONS
8.1 Financial/budget considerations There are no significant financial costs to the setting of speed limits. New signage will be required and for threshold type signage the cost is relatively high but would be undertaken within existing budgets. Considerable staff resources are required through the process.
8.2 Policy and planning implications Speed management is a key road safety issue directly aligned to National, Regional and Local strategies and a key outcome required under the Asset Management Plan. It is also directly aligned with 2030 outcomes and in particular: a) Active Environment. b) Easy Lifestyle. c) RLC Productivity and Performance.
8.3 Risks This is a core function of Council. Diverse community views are possible which may result in some negative perception. This can be managed with a clear message for the reasoning behind the proposed changes and the fact the programme supports the strategic outcomes of improved road safety.
8.4 Authority The Authority to approve this decision is with Council. This decision is only to set in motion the process with recommended changes to some speed limits. There will be a hearing to follow the public consultation and Council may choose to delegate this to a sub-committee who could make recommendations to Council for any final changes.
9. CONCLUSION Proposed changes to speed limits on some roads have been evaluated in accordance with the ‘Setting of Speed Limits 2017’ rule under the Land Transport regulations. It needs to be understood that some degree of flexibility has been used in making these recommendations particularly to avoid frequent speed limit changes and hence maintain consistency. Council in its consideration of these recommendations may make changes. Setting of final speed limits by Council is subject to oversight by NZTA who retain the authority to require Council to justify any decisions made under this rule. Both NZTA and the Commissioner of the Ministry of Transport retain the authority to change or modify any decision of Council cannot justify under the Rule.
Mayor Chairperson and Members STRATEGY POLICY & FINANCE COMMITTEE ROTORUA SPECIAL HOUSING AREAS POLICY Report prepared by: Chris Dillon, Senior Policy Advisor – Spatial Planning Report reviewed by: Henry Weston Acting Group Manager Operations &
The purpose of this report is to present the Rotorua Special Housing Areas Policy to establish the process and the evaluation criteria that will guide Council in making decisions on whether to accept a proposal for a Special Housing Area (SHA) and recommend to the Minister that a proposed SHA be established.
The policy will assist Council in carrying out its functions under the Housing Accords and Special
Housing Areas Act and in giving effect to the Accord.
2. RECOMMENDATION 3: 1. That the report “Rotorua Special Housing Areas Policy’ be received.
2. That the Committee recommends to Council the adoption of the Rotorua Special Housing Areas Policy to support the implementation of the Housing Accord.
3. BACKGROUND Council had worked with our local Member of Parliament and the previous Minister, Nick Smith, on the development of a Housing Accord. The Accord was signed on 31 August 2017. Copy of the Housing Accord is attached (Attachment 1).
4. DISCUSSION AND OPTIONS
4.1 The Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 came into force on 16 September 2013. 4.2 The purpose of the Act is to enhance housing affordability by facilitating an increase in land and
housing supply in certain regions or districts identified as having housing supply and affordability issues.
4.3 The Act permits the Minister and a territorial authority, whose district is identified as having housing supply and affordability issues, to enter into an agreement to work together to address housing supply and affordability.
4.4 Rotorua district has been identified as having housing supply and affordability issues. 4.5 The Minister and the Council have agreed to work together to address housing supply and
affordability issues in the Rotorua district through the signing of the Rotorua Housing Accord on 31 August 2017. The Minister and the Council agree that joint action is needed to improve housing supply and affordability in the Rotorua district and that building strong and resilient communities requires a housing market that is accessible and affordable with a variety of residential living options, including in rural areas.
4.6 To this end the Accord agreed aims and targets related to land supply and dwelling consents.
Contained under each of the four aims are several actions – those relevant to the formulation of this Special Housing Areas policy are listed below.
The Council will complete spatial planning process and district plan changes, including rezoning
The Council will work with developers on options to fund infrastructure
The Council will work with Regional council on comprehensive stormwater consent
The Council will identify any surplus land that may be suitable for housing development
The Minister will consider any recommendations coming from the Council on special housing areas
Housing New Zealand and the Council will explore options for the development of social housing
The Council will work with iwi to explore options for the development of papakāinga housing 4.7 These actions are incorporated into the criteria set out in the attached policy. 4.8 It is important to emphasise that there is now a new Government in place and it is likely that officials
and Ministers will want to take some time to assess their preferred way forward. This, however, should not preclude Council from advancing its thinking and policies on when SHAs could be sought.
5. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE Council has already approved the Housing Accord and the policy is intended to support the Accord’s implementation. The decisions or matters of this report are not considered significant in accordance with the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
6. COMMUNITY INPUT/ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLICITY
The proposed policy has been discussed with MBIE to ensure it covers all requirements of the legislation. The proposed policy stipulates that before recommending any SHA, appropriate consultation be undertaken including with any property owner directly affected, any directly adjoining landowners, tangata whenua when the area is within a rohe of a hapu which has a protocol with the Council, relevant infrastructure and service providers, and the relevant regional council.
7.2 Policy and planning implications The proposed Special Housing Areas Policy provides an assessment framework to assist Council in its decision-making. Any recommendations of Council will be reviewed by MBIE before being considered as a SHA.
7.3 Risks At this stage we remain unclear as to whether the new Government will continue to support the establishment of SHAs. However, we believe it prudent to ensure we have the policy in place to support any local proposals that will see an increase in the available housing stock for the district.
7.4 Authority Council is able to establish a policy to support its Housing Accord.
8. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Housing Accord Pages 53-59 Attachment 2: Special Housing Areas Policy Pages 60-64
Policy Purpose: The purpose of this Policy is to establish the process and the evaluation criteria that will guide Council in making decisions on whether to accept a proposal for an SHA and recommend to the Minister that a proposed SHA be established. The policy will assist Council in carrying out its functions under HASHAA and in giving effect to the Accord.
Policy: All proposals for an SHA will be processed and evaluated by Council in accordance with this policy. Special housing areas may originate from:
The Council identifying, considering and recommending areas to the Minister on its own initiative; and
Expressions of interest (EOIs) from landowners and developers for special housing areas that the Council considers meet the criteria listed below under section 3.4.
The Council will consider each proposed special housing area on its merits. In addition to the degree of consistency with this policy, other factors, such as planning and RMA matters, may be relevant to the Council’s exercise of discretion to make a recommendation to the Minister. The Council reserves full discretion whether to recommend an area to the Minister to be a special housing area.
Criteria for recommending a Special Housing Area to the Minister Council will evaluate a proposed SHA against the following criteria. 1. Locational characteristics The proposed Special Housing Area is either located inside an established urban area, or within an
area identified for urban expansion in the Rotorua Spatial Plan. This criterion does not apply to a Special Housing Area proposed to be developed for a papakāinga.
The proposed area is contiguous to the existing urban area. Priority will be given to development
proposals contiguous to land identified on ODP Planning Map 102 as “Medium Density”, followed by development proposals on land identified as “Low Density” on the same map. This criterion does not apply to a special development area proposed to be developed for a papakāinga.
For that land not within the established urban area, the degree to which the character and amenity
of the subject land is already affected by the proximity of urban land. Reverse sensitivity effects are avoided or mitigated at the interface of the proposed site and any
non -urban zone. The land is not unduly affected by the following constraints:
natural hazards (except where effects can be appropriately managed)
significant indigenous vegetation
presence of highly productive soils
significant archaeological, historic, ecological, landscape and cultural values. 2. Demand for qualifying development
The extent to which the proposed development(s) will achieve the purpose of the HASHAA and the Accord based on an assessment of housing size, form, character, section sizes, and density.
3. Affordability
The extent to which the proposed special housing area assists in improving the affordability of housing in the Rotorua District. This will be assessed in one of the following ways:
The significance of the contribution the proposed SHA makes to overall housing supply in the district
The incorporation of varying dwelling and section sizes within the development, particularly houses at least 25 % smaller than the median size of new dwellings in the district. This will be of particular importance for sites within the established urban area
The potential for a development to target people with specific housing needs such as first homes buyers, the elderly, people with special needs, people requiring rental housing, or people unable to access other housing for social and economic reasons.
4. Predominantly residential
The extent to which the proposed development is predominantly residential with the primary purpose of increasing residential housing supply
5. Adequate infrastructure For Council-related services of water supply, wastewater, transport, stormwater and reserves the Council is satisfied:
That infrastructure exists and has additional capacity to accommodate the likely cumulative demand from a qualifying development/s in the special housing area or infrastructure is planned or programmed in the Council’s Long Term Plan; and/or
That infrastructure would be provided and funded by the private sector ahead of the Long Term Plan programmed time at no additional cost to Council; and/or
Where not planned or programmed in the Council’s Long Term Plan, infrastructure would be fully provided and funded by the private sector at no cost to Council and can connect to existing infrastructure that has additional capacity to accommodate the likely cumulative demand from a qualifying development/s in the special housing area, and
For stormwater, mitigation will meet the conditions of any relevant consent held by the Council or such other relevant engineering standards that are applicable.
For other (non-Council) infrastructure of state highways, government facilities such as education, or network utilities (electricity, gas and telecommunications) the Council is satisfied that adequate infrastructure or services exist or is planned by the relevant service provider with additional capacity to accommodate the likely additional demand generated from a qualifying development/s in the special housing area.
6. Building Height The maximum calculated building height for a qualifying development in a special housing area will be determined as part of the declaration of that special housing area. It will be determined by the Council in discussion with the landowner/ developer with reference to:
a) The effects of the proposal on the characteristics of the land in the special housing area and land in the immediate vicinity;
b) The maximum height provided for in the zone of the operative District Plan that currently applies to the subject land;
c) The maximum height provided for in the zone of the operative District Plan that is intended to be applied to the land in the special housing area if this zone is different to the operative zone (e.g. the Residential 1 Zone may apply to a special housing area in a Rural Zone);
d) The maximum height provided for in the Act.
7. Minimum number of dwellings The extent to which the proposed SHA will deliver additional dwellings beyond a minimum of four additional dwellings.
Determination of Appropriate Residential Zone Provisions The matters that will be considered when determining the appropriate residential zone provisions to be applied in the assessment of the special housing area include:
a) The effects of the proposal on the characteristics of the land in the special housing area and land in the immediate vicinity.
b) The individual development proposal;
c) The appropriateness of the operative District Plan zone for the delivery of (a) qualifying development(s) on the site;
d) Whether another zone or other zone provisions in the operative District Plan may be more appropriate for the delivery of (a) qualifying development(s);
e) The purpose of the Act;
f) Delivery of the targets in the Rotorua Housing Accord.
Process for recommending a proposed Special Housing Area to the Minister
The full process for considering a proposed Special Housing Area is set out in Appendix 1. That part of the process which requires formal consideration and recommendation to the Minister (first two parts of stage 4) is expanded below:
Council will only recommend to the Minister of Housing to declare a special housing area when the Council is satisfied that:
a) The criteria in 3.4 of the Policy have been appropriately met; and
b) Necessary agreements have been secured with the land owner /developer; and
c) Where appropriate consultation has been undertaken including with any property owner directly affected, any directly adjoining landowners, tangata whenua when the area is within a rohe of a hapu which has a protocol with the Council, relevant infrastructure and service providers, the relevant regional council; and
d) The matter has been formally reported to Council and the Council has resolved to recommend the special housing area to the Minister.
Relevant delegations The Chief Executive, Group Manager Strategy and/or Group Manager Operations are delegated to enter into negotiations with landowners/developers interested in promoting a special housing area in accordance with this policy.
Mayor Chairperson and Members STRATEGY, POLICY & FINANCE BUSINESS CASE FOR SIR HOWARD MORRISON PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE Report prepared by: Joanna Doherty, Arts & Culture Business Development Manager
To provide Council with a business case for earthquake strengthening and enhancement of the Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts Centre (SHMPAC)
Approval is sought to go to detailed design for a performing arts centre that is fit for purpose and meets the user and audience needs, increases contribution to Rotorua’s economic performance and improves community pride and wellbeing
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In June 2017, during Annual Plan deliberations, Council agreed: ‘to commit to further development of the value proposition in conjunction with key stakeholders and bring back to Council for final approval to proceed with the Performing Arts Centre enhancement and upgrade (earthquake strengthening) project.’ Since then the detailed seismic assessment for SHMPAC has been completed and the building has been closed as it fell well below New Building Standard (NBS). We now have reasonable detail of the strengthening work that needs to be carried out, along with high level cost estimates. A detailed business case has been completed, which demonstrates the value to Rotorua of a well utilised performing arts centre, attracting shows that meet audience needs. It also highlights deficiencies in both the current building, beyond earthquake strengthening needs, and the operating model. The business case concludes that a thriving performing arts centre requires both a proactive management approach and a fit for purpose building. This paper focused on options for the building. A number of refurbishment options were put forward ranging from a complete rebuild to retaining the status quo. The preferred option involves required earthquake strengthening, modification of the Concert Chamber to a flexible 100-300 seat performance space, and an overhaul of the ambience and capabilities of the Foyer and Banquet Room, including a pre- & post-show bar. Additional options could be explored, to refurbish and expand the Civic Theatre to 1,000 seats, if external funding can be secured. $1million was set aside in this year’s Annual Plan to complete the value case and potentially start detailed design and construction. We are recommending that this detailed design work be initiated, and that staff start looking at options for external funding.
Funding decisions on the final recommended option will be made as part of the LTP process. 3. RECOMMENDATION 4:
1. That the report ‘BUSINESS CASE FOR SIR HOWARD MORRISON PERFORMING ARTS CENTRE’ be received.
2. That the Committee notes the resolution from the Annual Plan process to commit to further development of the value proposition and bring back to Council for final approval to proceed with the SHMPAC enhancement and upgrade.
3. That the Committee notes that the detailed seismic assessment for SHMPAC has been
completed and the building has been closed as it fell well below new building standards.
4. That the Committee agrees that the attached business case demonstrates the value proposition for both a strengthened and enhanced building.
5. That the Committee agrees that the preferred option involves required earthquake
strengthening, modification of the Concert Chamber to a flexible 100-300 seat performance space, and an overhaul of the ambience and capabilities of the Foyer and Banquet Room, including a pre- & post-show bar (Option 4). Additional options could be explored, to refurbish and expand the Civic Theatre to 1,000 seats, if external funding can be secured (Options 6 and 6a).
6. That the Committee agrees that detailed design work for strengthening and enhancing the
building should be commenced within the already agreed $1million envelope.
7. That the Committee notes that funding decisions on strengthening and enhancement work will be made as part of the LTP process, and that staff will start looking at external funding options.
4. BACKGROUND SHMPAC was opened in 1940 as the new Municipal Building and Theatre/Town Hall, originally designed in Spanish Mission Revival style. It is a Heritage New Zealand Category 1 building and is regarded as a fine example of a late inter-war purpose-built civic building. It was substantially altered in the 1990s and its use changed to a convention centre for the city. In 2010 the stage house and back stage areas of the Civic Theatre were substantially upgraded. In 2014 the building was renamed ‘Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts Centre’, to reflect a change in direction from convention centre for business events to a more focused performing arts space for the community. Promotion as a business events venue ceased but as yet there has been no corresponding investment in the venue or operating model for performing arts. Consequently current use is well below potential, this major community asset is significantly underutilised, and it is not aligned with Vision 2030 and The Rotorua Way.
Work began in 2014 to investigate options for investment in the Concert Chamber, which included significant community consultation. In the 2016 Annual Plan the community was asked whether to Council should focus solely on earthquake strengthening investment, or include renovation and upgrade. The result was a Council resolution that staff bring a clear value proposition with options for renovation and upgrade. External consultants have now completed a robust business case, building on the earlier community consultation. This business case has included extensive audience research as well as consultation with key user stakeholders including touring agents, promoters, local performing arts organisations and business events. Refer to Attachment 2 for the executive summary of the business case and Attachment 3 for a copy of the audience research. 5. DISCUSSION AND OPTIONS A Better Business Case approach was followed, as recommended by Treasury New Zealand and used by many Local Territorial Authorities. The starting point was a clear strategic case against which a long list of options was assessed to identify the preferred and most economic option. Both the capital investment and changes to the operating model of the centre were considered. Research undertaken as part of the business case development found that SHMPAC and its operating model do not meet the needs of user/hirer groups which in turn results in shows that do not meet audience needs. This has resulted in undersold shows and underutilisation of the venue. Audience perspective From an audience perspective, SHMPAC is highly valued by the community and three quarters of those surveyed agreed it is worth investing in. 92% of Rotorua residents are interested in some aspect of the performing arts.
7 This figure would reduce to 22% without usage for the Da Vinci exhibition following closure of Rotorua Museum
Despite this interest, in the last 12 months only 56% of residents attended a show in Rotorua, and 37% of residents travelled outside of Rotorua to attend a show. This equates to a spend of about $5 million per year in Rotorua, and an additional $7.2 million elsewhere (spend per event $219 outside Rotorua vs $101 in Rotorua – includes tickets, food & beverage). The two key reasons for the disparity between interest and attendance were identified: Rotorua did not attract the quality or type of shows wanted; and/or residents were not aware of shows that were on.
There is a significant opportunity to provide Rotorua audiences with more, higher quality shows that better meet their interests, as well as to significantly improve audience development and communication. The research estimates there is potential to grow local resident spend by 25%-50%. Encouraging attendance among international visitors is also an opportunity, with the research indicating Rotorua lacks things to do at night for this group. Hirer perspective Overall the current configuration, standard and operating model of SHMPAC does not meet hirer expectations and results in Rotorua missing out on opportunities to host a greater number and range of attractive national and international performing arts shows.
Feedback Hirer group Benefits if addressed Civic Theatre too large for many local shows and smaller touring shows (expect audiences of 100-300)
Small performing arts (PA) companies Local pro-am companies
Increased utilisation
More small touring PA product
More affordable, better spaces for local pro-am and community shows
Examples of shows that did not tour to SHMPAC include: As Night Falls, Anzac Eve, The Book of Everything, Modern Māori Quartet, The Mooncake and the Kumara
Civic Theatre too small for popular shows (need 1,000 seats for commercial viability)
Commercial promoters
More popular shows (by comparison, currently in Napier (990 seats) but not SHMPAC (686 seats): That Bloody Woman, Dublin’s Irish Tenors, Jimmy Carr, Kevin Bloody Wilson, Michael Jackson Story, Moscow Ballet’s Nutcracker, and in past years, Celtic Illusion, Pink Floyd Experience, 7 Days Live, The Wiggles)
Higher utilisation
Improves financial performance of theatre
Concert Chamber acoustics are inadequate for choral/voice/small ensemble acoustic performance.
Small PA companies Local pro-am companies
Enables a different style of small performance to that in the Concert Chamber
Increases utilisation
Improves flexibility
Banquet Room is difficult to use effectively in its current configuration – either for performing arts or business events
Business event organisers Non PA community PA - unassisted vocal performance
Significantly improved financial performance
Reconfiguration provides larger, more versatile floor space
Improved utilisation
Excellent exhibition space for both conferences and community organisations
Great option for unassisted vocal performance
Multiple, diverse spaces are particularly attractive for festival type events, outreach, and business events
Local community organisations Larger national organisations
SHMPAC becomes a vibrant, welcoming and highly effective venue and destination for a wide range of community and PA events
Increased utilisation
Supports outreach and audience development objectives
The Civic Theatre stage, load in facilities, flying system and dressing rooms are considered acceptable, except for stage depth for Royal NZ Ballet and backstage areas for large community groups
All PA companies Business event organisers
An extended stage would guard against losing the Royal NZ Ballet and bring SHMPAC in line with competing venues which offer standard stage size
Improvements could be made in technical equipment, stage cloths and the orchestra pit
All PA companies Business event organisers
Improved audience experience of orchestral performance
Improves utility of stage for a wider range of PA and entertainment uses
Reduced costs for community and non-commercial users
SHMPAC does not have an engaged relationship with regional audiences making it difficult to support and fill shows
Most small PA companies and hirers
Improved confidence among hirers and hirer networks resulting in more of the right shows
Becomes the undisputed expert on marketing to audiences in the Rotorua region
Becomes an integral part of NZs touring performing arts and entertainment network
Total costs of use are high
Small companies Local non-commercial hirers
More small touring PA shows
More, and more regular, use by local non-commercial hirers
Supports Rotorua’s destination marketing strategy and spend
Significantly increases Rotorua’s presence in the business events market
Subsequent advantage to the local Rotorua accommodation and visitor product sectors
Association conference attendees are, typically, the highest spending domestic visitor segment
Meeting audience and hirer needs will result in a more vibrant, diverse and active performing arts sector in Rotorua. Research undertaken by Creative New Zealand indicates an active and engaged performing arts sector provides a range of benefits including:
A measurable positive contribution to the economy
Improved educational outcomes
A more highly skilled workforce
Improved health outcomes and personal well-being Investment options
Option 1: Baseline Earthquake strengthening
Earthquake strengthening to meet 67% New Building Standard (NBS) rating
Option 2: Demolition and replacement of SHMPAC
Demolition and replacement of SHMPAC to include three quality, fit for purpose performance space
Upgrade Concert Chamber to a quality, flexible performance space for audiences of 100-300
Upgrade Civic Theatre stage apron to provide better side access and a full orchestra pit
Option 4: Upgrades to Foyer Spaces & Banquet Room including addition of bar facility
Refurbish Foyer and Banquet Room, add operable walls/doors between the two to improve flexibility, access and flow
Add bar for pre-show, intermission and post-show
Enhance utility of Banquet Room with movable stage, thermal shades and new rigging points for lighting, sound and hanging
Increase number of toilets to meet building standards
Consider moving ticket office and toilets to enable better use of premium north-facing space
Option 5: Option 4 plus rebuild Banquet Room in rectangular form
Rebuild Banquet Room in rectangular form to enhance acoustic performance and provide optimal format for business events, exhibitions and banquet dinners
Option 6: Option 5 plus Civic Theatre upgrade to 1,000 seats
Refurbish theatre to update aesthetics and improve ambience
Increase seating in auditorium to maximum possible audience capacity of about 1,000
Option 6a: Option 4 plus Civic Theatre upgrade to 1,000 seats
Refurbish theatre to update aesthetics and improve ambience
Increase seating in auditorium to maximum possible audience capacity of about 1,000
6. ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS The seven investment options were assessed against the following investment objectives and critical success factors. Investment objectives were to:
Optimise value from a performing arts centre
Provide a contemporary performing arts environment
Provide performing arts facilities, equipment and services that are market competitive and meet legislative requirements
Maximise vibrancy in and around the venue The critical success factors included:
Strategic fit
Value for money
Achievability of investment objectives
Capacity and capability to deliver
Potential affordability A summary of this assessment is detailed in the following table.
Investment Objectives To optimise the value from a performing arts centre: • enable diversity of performance • affordable/accessible to community performers • positive experience (amenity, service, feel)
No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
To provide a contemporary performing arts environment: • that conveys Rotorua’s identity • that attracts a diverse range of touring & local productions • that meets the needs of the people of the Rotorua Lakes and surrounding regions, including visitors
No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
To provide performing arts facilities, equipment and services that are market competitive and meet legislation and Council Policy with respect to building design and construction
No
Yes
Partial
Partial
Partial
Yes
Yes
To maximise vibrancy in and around the venue No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Critical Success Factors
CSF 1: Strategic fit with RLC 2030 Vision and 'The Rotorua Way'
No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
CSF 2: Value for money No
No
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
CSF 3: Achievability of ILM objectives No
Yes
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
CSF 4: Capacity and capability of RLC, development partners and consultant team
Measured against the investment objectives and critical success factors, option 1 is excluded, and option 2 is rejected on the basis of lack of affordability and value for money. We consider the option that meets the majority of the investment objectives and critical success factors, as well as being more affordable than the top end, fully reconfigured options (6 and 6a), is option 4. Projections in the business case suggest the net operating cost would be similar to a status quo model, but by year 10 would be attracting around 60% more people (40,000). More comprehensive options could be explored at a later date and/or depending on external funding. 7. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
As the decisions in this report only involve proceeding to detailed design work, they are not considered significant, and are in line with decisions made in this year’s Annual Plan deliberations.
Funding decisions on how and when any option could be implemented will be considered through the Long Term Planning process in consultation with the community.
8. COMMUNITY INPUT/ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLICITY In 2014, significant consultation was undertaken with a wide range of local performing arts stakeholders, to investigate current performance activities, venues used, wants, needs and gaps in terms of SHMPAC as a venue, and the frequency and types of performances suitable for SHMPAC. As part of this business case process, Delve Research was engaged to conduct robust research into current audience behaviour, audience wants and needs in terms of types of shows and venue facilities and services, and the size and value of the current and potential audiences. Surveys were sent to more than 5,000 engaged users, and an additional 200 telephone and face-to-face interviews were conducted with local residents, and 50 interviews with international visitors. In addition, Horwath HTL – the company engaged to complete the business case – interviewed a cross section of key users including promoters, touring agents, business events organisers and local performing arts groups including Māori/Te Arawa groups, Rotorua Little Theatre and Rotorua Musical Theatre. 9. CONSIDERATIONS 9.1 Financial/budget considerations Any detailed design work undertaken will fall within the already approved $1million funding enveloped. The intention is that the detailed design work will be undertaken in such a way that any work can be phased or scaled back depending on available funding. At this stage, we only have indicative costs for strengthening and refurbishment work but these are noted below for sake of completeness:
For earthquake strengthening only, Beca estimate: $2.7million (accuracy range -15% - +35%)
Option 4 cost estimate range $9.6 - $11.9million o Earthquake strengthening o Concert Chamber remodelling o Refurbishment of Foyer & Banquet Room
External funding will be sought for all stages of the development.
9.2 Policy and planning implications Planning alignment This business case, which sets out the value proposition for investment in SHMPAC beyond earthquake strengthening alone, flows from the Annual Plan deliberations on 6-7 June 2017, whereby Council resolved the following: That Council agree to commit to further development of the value proposition in conjunction with key stakeholders and bring back to Council for final approval to proceed with the Performing Arts Centre enhancement and upgrade (earthquake strengthening) project. 9.3 Risks The risks of proceeding through to detailed design are minimal. On the other hand, the risk of doing nothing at this stage will result in considerable delays for a building that is already closed to the public. 9.4 Authority The SP&F Committee has the authority to make this recommendation to Council. 10. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Floorplan of SHMPAC Page 75 Attachment 2: Business case executive summary Pages 76 - 85 Attachment 3: Audience research Pages 86 - 107 The full business case, high level cost estimates and detailed seismic assessment will all be available on Stellar.
Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts Centre (SHMPAC)
Business Case for Modification & Renovation
Executive Summary
Prepared for: Rotorua Lakes Council
Prepared by: Horwath HTL Limited
Date: 6 November 2017
Status: Business Case
Horwath HTL Limited is a member Crowe Horwath International, a Swiss Verein.
Each member of Crowe Horwath is licensed to include “Horwath” in its legal name but remains a separate and independent legal entity.
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
78 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
Table of Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2 Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
79 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
1 Introduction
This Business Case investigates the potential upgrade and renovation of the Sir Howard Morrison Performing Arts Centre (“SHMPAC”). The building requires seismic strengthening work to the Concert Chamber and, as Council has recently been advised, other parts of the venue. Council has just completed a seismic assessment to inform the level of investment required to bring the venue back to compliance with Council’s policy and the Building Act. The key objective of the Business Case is to assist Rotorua Lakes Council (“Council” / “RLC”) with decision-making in relation to whether, or to what extent, additional investment in the building will improve its configuration, facilities, ambience and use as a performing arts venue. The Business Case follows the NZ Treasury Better Business Case guidelines and is organised around the ‘five case’ model. It has been compiled by Horwath HTL for Council, builds on existing research and data provided by Council’s Arts and Culture Business Unit and Project Management Office (PMO), adding to earlier information and with new research undertaken by Horwath HTL and Delve Research. The research fills gaps in the original information and includes data about current and potential audiences, visitors to Rotorua, and event organisers operating on a national and / or regional basis. The new market research has included consultation with key stakeholders in the performing arts, commercial entertainment and community organisation sectors. These organisations / promoters can be broadly categorised1 as:
funded performing arts companies (generally reliant on funding from central government, local government, sponsorship, philanthropic and charitable sources)
major international entertainment promoters active in the New Zealand market
smaller New Zealand promoters (who may or may not have international affiliations, but who are generally not engaged in major arena or stadium sized commercial promotion)
local Rotorua community-based organisations. Smaller domestic promoters were also sought for consultation, although were unavailable for a variety of reasons. However, the parties consulted have provided a comprehensive picture of the market for performing arts and commercial entertainment in New Zealand. It is not likely that any alternative views would emerge if the consultation was extended. A number of Professional Conference Organisers (“PCOs”) who are familiar with the conference and business event facilities in Rotorua (including SHMPAC) and more widely throughout New Zealand, were also consulted. 1 Some of the organisations / promoters can be assigned to more than one of the categories.
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
80 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
2 Executive Summary
RLC has established that SHMPAC in its current configuration and state of presentation does not support Council’s ambitions as expressed in the “Vision 2030” and “The Rotorua Way” strategic statements. Council has identified a number of problems with the facility, including significant under-utilisation of the asset, a lack of flexibility with the existing building leading to a lower number of events being presented to Rotorua audiences, and a poor physical ambience that does not reflect Rotorua’s identity and expectations. These problems are reflected in the proposed strategic response as shown in the Investment Logic Map (“the ILM”) in Section 3, Figure 3.1. As a result of these problems, SHMPAC has experienced a significant decline in events, utilisation, revenue and attendee numbers. The Business Case research has identified that by far the largest proportion of lost revenue arises because SHMPAC has recently lost most of its business event revenue, and regaining these revenues is a key requirement if SHMPAC is to become a sustainable regional performing arts centre in the future. This information emerged during the course of the development of the Business Case and was not contemplated in Council’s original Business Case RFP. The modelling of potential short-listed Options demonstrates a lower SHMPAC annual operating deficit would be achievable with a higher level of business events (although at a higher capital cost to ensure the venue is more fit for purpose for such events). Most performing arts centres include business events in their event schedule wherever possible for this reason. The booking of business events at these venues is usually managed to ensure the performing arts “branding” of the venue is not unduly compromised. Research studies have demonstrated that the net economic benefit of business events to regional economies is significant because such events – particularly multi-day conferences – reliably bring new visitor spending to the region. Such events tend to bring larger number numbers of visitors to the region than touring or regional performing arts events, except in the major cities. Rotorua has in the past been a very competitive destination for business events and has all the characteristics required to be competitive again in the future, except for a fit for purpose nationally competitive venue. The research has identified two business needs that are central to the future success of SHMPAC in meeting the needs of the RLC and Rotorua residents and visitors.
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
81 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
These two requirements are:
actively investing in partnerships with performing arts, entertainment and event companies and / or actively investing in a greater or lesser degree in audience development initiatives locally (which we refer to as the “Performing Arts Centre model” or “PAC model”)
modifying and renovating SHMPAC so that it is “fit for purpose” for a wider range of event organisers, both local, regional and national, professional, community and subsidised performing arts, and business events, as well as a wide range of other potential community users. Council has recently established the Arts and Culture Business Unit, which is understood to be a nascent PAC model (“PAC lite”), which can be further developed and refined over time to become a fully resourced and successful performing PAC (“PAC full”) and the Business Case supports that development as a critical initiative. In establishing the potential ‘fit for purpose’ requirements, the Business Case reviews an extensive long list of options for the modification and renovation of SHMPAC. The long-list of options is as follows:
Option 1: Baseline – do nothing except required seismic upgrades
Option 2: Demolition and replacement
Option 3: Concert Chamber upgrade – significantly upgrade the Concert Chamber and make minor upgrades to the Civic Theatre
Option 4: Foyers and Banquet Room upgrade – Option 3 plus an upgrade of the foyers and Banquet Room
Option 5: Modify Banquet Room – Option 4 plus redevelopment of the Banquet Room
Option 6: Modify the Civic Theatre 1 – Option 5 plus a Civic Theatre upgrade to refurbish the theatre and increase seat numbers to +/- 1,000
Option 6a: Modify the Civic Theatre 2 – Option 4 plus a Civic Theatre upgrade to refurbish the theatre and increase seat numbers to +/- 1,000 Based on the utilisation and financial modelling undertaken, the Business Case suggests that Council should pursue, at least at this stage, either Option 5 or 6, based mainly on ‘Value for Money’ criteria.
Detailed financial modelling of all short-listed Options has been undertaken.
Option 2 was not shortlisted because it delivers the same outcomes as Options 6 / 6a but at a very significantly higher cost. Options 6 is the highest cost option, but delivers the best Value for Money (defined as the package of benefits achieved (including tangible and intangible direct and indirect benefits compared to total costs
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
82 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
Options 5 and 6 were not originally anticipated but emerged as a result of the consultation with the hirer market. Both upgrade options will deliver higher utilisation and additional operating revenues. In some cases, charitable and / or community trusts have been successful in raising funds for similar venue upgrade projects from philanthropic and other community funding sources. The Tables and Charts below summarise the range of short-listed Options considered in the Business Case. Options 5 and 6 achieve the best financial outcomes, measured as Net Operating Cost before Interest and Depreciation (see Table 2.1 and Chart 2.1). Option 6a ranks third on this measure.
Options 5 and 6 achieve the best financial outcomes, measured as Net Operating Cost after Interest and Depreciation (see Table 2.1 and Chart 2.2). Option 6a ranks similarly with the remainder of the options on this measure. In terms of utilisation and event days, the ranking from highest to lowest is Option 6, then Option 6a, then the remainder of the options in order from 5 to 1.
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
83 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
Brief Description
Y1
Y3
Y5
Y10
Option 1
Seis mic Upgra de a s required plus
Implementa tion of the Arts a nd
Culture Bus ines s Unit a s currently
Propos ed a nd Funded
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue
N.O.C before I&D
N.O.C a fter I&D Ca
pex
257
45,754
$696,944
-$863,654
-$1,074,254
295
54,352
$842,709
-$873,456
-$1,084,056
316
61,640
$982,023
-$891,935
-$1,102,535
336
78,236
$1,281,777
-$1,000,451
-$1,211,051
$4,500,000
Option 3
Ba s eline plus modifica tion of the
Concert Cha mber to ma ke it more
flexible a nd fit for purpos e, plus
minor
modifica tions to the Civic
Thea tre a nd the
implementa tion of a full PAC
model
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue
N.O.C before I&D
N.O.C a fter I&D
Ca pex
267
46,008
$731,881
-$753,277
-$1,132,357
365
63,891
$989,957
-$810,072
-$1,189,152
430
78,663
$1,226,527
-$789,028
-$1,168,108
541
116,753
$1,752,150
-$809,444
-$1,188,524
$8,100,000
Option 4
Option 3 plus the complete overha ul
of the a mbience a nd fa cilities ca pa
bility of the foyers a nd Ba nquet
Room
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue
N.O.C before I&D
N.O.C a fter I&D
Ca pex
275
47,339
$827,935
-$830,376
-$1,387,296
380
66,635
$1,242,974
-$751,848
-$1,308,768
449
81,944
$1,578,286
-$700,195
-$1,257,115
587
121,629
$2,430,514
-$627,776
-$1,184,696
$11,900,000
Option 5
Option 4 plus a reconfigura tion of the
Ba nquet Room to ma ke it more fit for
purpos e for a wider ra nge of us es ,
both in the Performing Arts a nd Bus
ines s Events
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue
N.O.C before I&D
N.O.C a fter I&D Ca
pex
302
52,474
$1,138,187
-$715,486
-$1,454,926
416
73,549
$1,733,848
-$560,684
-$1,300,124
498
91,353
$2,267,647
-$422,649
-$1,162,089
660
137,368
$3,649,023
-$133,448
-$872,888
$15,800,000
Option 6
Option 5 plus a n upgra de of the Civic
Thea tre including genera l refurbis
hment a nd expa ns ion of the s ea ting
numbers
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue
N.O.C before I&D
N.O.C a fter I&D Ca
pex
307
61,205
$1,299,876
-$674,830
-$1,727,830
424
88,395
$2,017,493
-$486,012
-$1,539,012
508
109,732
$2,654,799
-$318,348
-$1,371,348
675
164,359
$4,256,555
$44,381
-$1,008,619
$21,400,000
Option 6 (a)
Option 4 plus a n upgra de of the Civic
Thea tre including genera l refurbis
hment a nd expa ns ion of the s ea ting
numbers
Event Da ys
Annua l Pa x
Revenue N.O.C
before I&D N.O.C a
fter I&D
Ca pex
283
54,257
$979,627
-$779,631
-$1,598,631
391
78,162
$1,534,755
-$647,982
-$1,466,982
464
95,663
$1,981,441
-$549,953
-$1,368,953
608
140,215
$3,060,557
-$366,293
-$1,185,293
$17,500,000
Table 2.1 summarises the key projections including indicative utilisation, net operating cost before and after interest and depreciation costs for each of the short-listed options (ie: excluding Option 2). Table 2.1: Development Options Summary Table
(Source: Horwath HTL, RLC)
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
84 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
Chart 2.1: Annual Net Operating Cost (before interest & depreciation) Years 1–10 (Source: Horwath HTL) Chart 2.2: Annual Net Operating Cost (after interest & depreciation) Years 1–10
(Source: Horwath HTL)
Figure 2.1 summarises our analysis of most of the SHMPAC Options, including assessment of Critical Success Factors between the development options, and the extent to which each Options meets the ILM investment objectives.
Rotorua Lakes Council – Private and Confidential Business Case Executive Summary – SHMPAC Modification and Renovation 6 November 2017
Page 85
85 Strategy, Policy & Finance Committee meeting
ATTACHMENT 2 9 November 2017
Figure 2.1: Summary Analysis of most of the SHMPAC Development Options
Scope Options (What)
Description of Option
Baseline = PAC (lite) + Concert
Chamber seismic work
Option 3 = PAC
(full) + Upgrade Concert
Chamber
Option 4 = 3 + Upgrade
Foyer & Banquet Room
Option 5 = 4 + Modify
Banquet Room
Option 6 =
5 + Upgrade Civic Theatre
(refurbish, expand seating)
Option 6a =
4 + Upgrade Civic Theatre
(refurbish, expand seating)
Investment Objectives
To optimise the value from a performing arts centre: • enable diversity of performance • affordable / accessible to community performers • positive experience (amenity, service, feel)
No
Partial
??
Partial
???
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
To provide a contemporary performing arts environment: • that conveys Rotorua’s identity • that can attract a diverse range of touring and local productions • that meet the needs of the people of the Rotorua Lakes and surrounding regions, including visitors
No
Partial ??
Partial ??
Yes
✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Provide performing arts facilities, equipment and services that are market competitive and meet legislation and Council Policy with respect to building design and construction
No
Partial ??
Partial ???
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓
To maximise vibrancy in and around the venue
No
Partial ?
Partial ??
Yes
✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓Critical Success Factors
CSF 1: Strategic fit with RLC 2030 Vision and 'The Rotorua Way'
No
Partial ??
Partial ???
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓CSF 2: Value For Money No
Partial ?
Yes
✓
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓CSF 3: Achievability of ILM objectives
No
Partial ???
Yes
✓
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓CSF 4: RLC etc. capability and capacity
Yes ✓✓✓
Yes ✓✓✓
Yes ✓✓✓
Yes ✓✓✓
Yes ✓✓✓
Yes ✓✓✓
CSF 5: Potential affordability
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓
Yes
✓✓✓
Short list? No No Yes Yes Yes Yes (Source: Horwath HTL)
