Regulatory Performance Committee

Agenda

 

 

Notice of Meeting:

An ordinary meeting of the Regulatory Performance Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 26 July 2017

Time:                                    9am

Venue:                                 Committee Room 1, Level 2, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Membership

Chairman

Deputy Chairman

Members

Councillor David East

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Glenn Livingstone

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

20 July 2017

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Leonie Rae

General Manager Consenting & Compliance

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

Note:  The reports contained within this agenda are for consideration and should not be construed as Council policy unless and until adopted.  If you require further information relating to any reports, please contact the person named on the report.
To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
https://www.ccc.govt.nz/the-council/meetings-agendas-and-minutes/

 


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

Regulatory Performance Committee - Terms of Reference

 

 

Chair

Councillor East

Membership

Councillor Gough (Deputy Chair), Councillor Chen, Councillor Galloway, Councillor Livingstone, Councillor Scandrett, Councillor Templeton

Quorum

Half of the members if the number of members (including vacancies) is even, or a majority of members if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.

Meeting Cycle

Monthly

Reports To

Council

 

 

Responsibilities

The focus of the Regulatory Performance Committee is Council’s regulatory and compliance functions. The Committee seeks to foster:

·         active citizenship, community participation and community partnerships

·         innovation and creativity

·         active citizenship, community participation and community partnerships

·         innovation and creativity

·         relationship with key partner organisations and agencies

·         engagement with community boards on bylaw development and review

 

 

The Regulatory Performance Committee considers and reports to Council on issues and activites relating to:

·         Council’s regulatory and compliance functions

·         Council’s regulatory and compliance functions under:

Resource Management Act 1991 and related legislation

Building Act 2004 and the New Zealand Building Code

Dog Control Act 1996

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002

Historic Places Act 1980

District Plan

Bylaws

Other regulatory matters

·         District planning

·         Approval and monitoring of Council’s list of hearings commissioners under the Resource Management Act 1991.

·         relationship with key partner organisations and agencies

·         engagement with community boards on bylaw development and review

 

 


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

C       1.       Apologies.......................................................................................................................... 4

B       2.       Declarations of Interest................................................................................................... 4

C       3.       Confirmation of Previous Minutes................................................................................. 4

B       4.       Deputations by Appointment........................................................................................ 4

B       5.       Presentation of Petitions................................................................................................ 4

STAFF REPORTS

C       6.       Update Report - Street-based Sex Work Bylaw Options Working Party .................. 9

C       7.       Review of the Stock Control Bylaw 2008, and proposed new Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017 (for consultation).................................................................................................. 11

C       8.       Review of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 and Speed Limits Bylaw 2010, and proposed new Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 (for consultation)............................ 51

A       9.       Review of the General Bylaw 2008............................................................................... 91

A       10.     Easter Sunday Trading Hours..................................................................................... 103

b       11.     Building Consenting Unit Update - July 2017............................................................ 111

C       12.     Regulatory Compliance Unit Status Report ............................................................. 121

B       13.     Resource Consents Monthly Report ......................................................................... 129   

 

 


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

1.   Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

2.   Declarations of Interest

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

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

That the minutes of the Regulatory Performance Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 7 June 2017 be confirmed (refer page 5).

4.   Deputations by Appointment

There were no deputations by appointment at the time the agenda was prepared. 

5.   Presentation of Petitions

There were no petitions received at the time the agenda was prepared.  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

 

Regulatory Performance Committee

Open Minutes

 

 

Date:                                     Wednesday 7 June 2017

Time:                                    9:01am

Venue:                                 Committee Room 1, Level 2, Civic Offices,
53 Hereford Street, Christchurch

 

 

Present

Chairman

Deputy Chairman

Members

Councillor David East

Councillor Jamie Gough

Councillor Jimmy Chen

Councillor Anne Galloway

Councillor Tim Scandrett

Councillor Sara Templeton

 

 

6 June 2017

 

 

 

Principal Advisor

Leonie Rae

General Manager Consenting & Compliance

 

Aidan Kimberley

Committee and Hearings Advisor

941 6566

aidan.kimberley@ccc.govt.nz

www.ccc.govt.nz

To view copies of Agendas and Minutes, visit:
www.ccc.govt.nz/Council/meetingminutes/agendas/index

 


Part A        Matters Requiring a Council Decision

Part B         Reports for Information

Part C         Decisions Under Delegation

 

 

 

The agenda was dealt with in the following order.

1.   Apologies

Part C

 

 

Committee Resolved RPCM/2017/00015

That the apology from Councillor Livingstone and apology for early departure from Councillor Chen be accepted.

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Chen                                                                                                                 Carried

 

2.   Declarations of Interest

Part B

There were no declarations of interest recorded.

 

3.   Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Part C

Committee Resolved RPCM/2017/00016

Committee Decision

That the minutes of the Regulatory Performance Committee meeting held on Wednesday, 10 May 2017 be confirmed.

Councillor Chen/Councillor Galloway                                                                                                                  Carried

 

4.   Deputations by Appointment

Part B

There were no deputations by appointment.

5.   Presentation of Petitions

Part B

There was no presentation of petitions.

 

Councillor Templeton joined the meeting at 9:04 am.


 

6.   Temporary Alcohol Ban in Riccarton Racecourse Area on New Zealand Cup Day 2017

 

Committee Decided RPCM/2017/00017

Part A

That the Regulatory Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Resolve it is satisfied that:

a.         There is evidence that the area to which the Alcohol Restrictions in Public Places Bylaw 2009 (the Bylaw) applies has experienced a high level of crime or disorder and that this can be shown to have been caused, or made worse, by alcohol consumption in the area; and

b.         The Bylaw, as applied by the resolution:

i.          is appropriate and proportionate in the light of the evidence; and

ii.         can be justified as a reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms.

2.         Resolve to impose a temporary alcohol ban in the area of the Riccarton Racecourse, namely:  both sides of the streets being Yaldhurst Road to Middlepark Road; Epsom Road to Racecourse Road; Buchanans Road to Masham Road to Yaldhurst Road (see Attachment A – map) from 7am to 12 midnight on 18 November 2017 (New Zealand Cup Day).

3.         Request that a Public Notice be placed in the newspaper and signage be provided in key public places covered by the alcohol ban.

Councillor Scandrett/Councillor Chen                                                                                                                 Carried

 

7.   Update of the Building Consenting Unit

 

Committee Resolved RPCM/2017/00018

Part C

That the Regulatory Performance Committee receive the information in this report.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Gough                                                                                                           Carried

 

 

8.   Resource Consents Monthly Report

 

Committee Resolved RPCM/2017/00019

Part C

1.         That Regulatory Performance Committee receive the information in this report.

Councillor Templeton/Councillor Scandrett                                                                                                     Carried

 

 

9.   Presentation - Alcohol Licensing Unit

 

Allison Houston, Team Leader Alcohol Licensing, addressed the Committee regarding the work of the Alcohol Licensing Team.

Councillor Scandrett left the meeting at 10:13 am.

Councillor Chen left the meeting at 10:15 am.

 

   

Meeting concluded at 10:26am.

 

CONFIRMED THIS 26TH DAY OF JULY 2017

 

Councillor David East

Chairman

   


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

6.        Update Report - Street-based Sex Work Bylaw Options Working Party

Reference:

17/634541

Contact:

Teena Crocker

Teena.Crocker@ccc.govt.nz

941 8851

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       This report is to update the Committee on the street-based sex work bylaw options working party.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

That the Regulatory Performance Committee:

1.         Receive the information in this report.

 

3.   Key Points

3.1       At its 25 May 2017 meeting the Council considered options for addressing issues arising from street-based sex work on and around Manchester Street, particularly in residential areas. 

3.2       The Council directed staff to explore regulatory options and to continue with non-regulatory options, resolving:

·  That the Council direct staff to:

·                1.            Continue to work with relevant agencies and residents to address issues arising from street-based sex work;

·                2.            Nominate Councillors Cotter and Swiggs and a representative from the Linwood-Central-Heathcote Community Board to join the inter-agency working group.

·                3.            Bring a report to the Regulatory Performance Committee by end of September 2017 to consider options for a new bylaw clause that regulates the location of street-based sex work away from residential areas to be workshopped with the working group prior to reporting to the Council.

3.3       Given the purpose, nature and membership of the inter-agency group, it is not appropriate for it to be tasked with looking at regulatory options by the Council. 

3.4       A Council working group, made up of the nominated elected members, will work with staff to engage with the members of the inter-agency group, as well as residents and other interested parties, about the options.

4.   Inter-agency group

4.1       The inter-agency group is an ad hoc group that has been meeting informally for several years to discuss issues relating to street-based sex work.

4.2       The group comprises a range of organisations, each of which is a stakeholder in its own right.  Meetings usually involve representatives from the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective, Salvation Army, Youth and Cultural Development, New Zealand Police and the Council (both elected members and staff).

4.3       The elected member involvement with the inter-agency group waned due to the recent local body elections and has been reinstated by the Council resolution set out above.

4.4       It is not appropriate for the inter-agency group to be tasked with work by the Council, but it is important that the inter-agency group is involved in the bylaw options and non-regulatory approaches. 

5.   Street-based sex work bylaw options working party

5.1       The third Council resolution directs staff to bring a report to the Regulatory Performance Committee setting out bylaw options, and to have workshopped the options with the working group. 

5.2       Given the nature of the inter-agency group, it is appropriate to establish a working party made up of the nominated elected members, which is set up as a subordinate recommendatory body to work with staff.

5.3       The elected member working party can then engage with the range of stakeholders on the options and considerations (including the inter-agency group), and contribute to the staff report that is due in September.

6.   Objectives for the working party

6.1       The working party comprises: Councillors Cotter and Swiggs, and Community Board member Alexandra Davids. It will be known as the Street-based Sex Work (SBSW) Bylaw Options Working Party.

6.2       The third clause of the Council’s resolution (see paragraph 3.2) constitutes the Working Party’s terms of reference. The Working Party has adopted three internal objectives which it will work towards to fulfil its terms of reference. These will be in place until the next step is confirmed (that is, when the September report has been considered by the Regulatory Performance Committee). 

6.3       The objectives are as follows:

6.3.1   To consider bylaw options (as well as non-regulatory options) for addressing the identified issues impacting on residents in and around parts of Manchester Street; and

6.3.2   To enter into informal discussions with the inter-agency group, residents and other interested parties about these options; and

6.3.3   To provide input, by mid-August 2017, into the staff report on bylaw options for regulating the location of street-based sex work away from residential areas.

7.   Next steps

7.1       After the September report to the Regulatory Performance Committee, the future work of the working party (if any) will be clearer.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Signatories

Author

Teena Crocker - Senior Policy Analyst

Approved By

Helen Beaumont - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

7.        Review of the Stock Control Bylaw 2008, and proposed new Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017 (for consultation)

Reference:

17/686702

Contact:

Teena Crocker

Teena.Crocker@ccc.govt.nz

941 8851

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Regulatory Performance Committee to consider the review of the Stock Control Bylaw 2008, and to recommend the proposed replacement bylaw, the Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017, to Council for adoption for public consultation.

Origin of Report

1.2       The Council has an agreed ten-year timetable for coordinating the review of bylaws. The review of this bylaw aligns with the timetable and ensures the review will comply with legislative review requirements under Section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA 2002).

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.2       The level of significance was determined by the limited number of people likely to be affected by the changes and the alignment of the changes with other requirements already in place, including the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 and traffic legislation.

2.3       This report concerns the review of the existing bylaw and proposes a replacement bylaw for public consultation. The community engagement and consultation outlined in this report reflect the ‘low significance’ assessment.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Regulatory Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Notes that:

a.         this report concerns the review of the Christchurch City Council Stock Control Bylaw 2008 (the current bylaw)

b.         the review of the current bylaw has resulted in the development of a replacement bylaw, the Christchurch City Council Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017 (the proposed replacement bylaw)

c.         in order to complete the review, revocation and replacement process, legislation requires the Council to consider and determine certain things, and to consult on the proposed replacement bylaw.

2.         Receives the attached section 155 analysis report.

3.         Resolves to replace the current bylaw with the proposed replacement bylaw as a result of the review and section 155 analysis, in accordance with section 160 of the Local Government Act 2002, subject to changes as a result of the consultation process.

4.         Resolves that the proposed replacement bylaw meets the requirements of section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, in that:

a.         a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems; and

b.         the proposed bylaw (subject to the outcome of the consultation process) is the most appropriate form of bylaw; and

c.         the proposed bylaw gives rise to some implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 but is not inconsistent with that Act.

5.         Adopts the proposed replacement bylaw for public consultation.

6.         Notes:

a.         that staff will prepare consultation information and undertake consultation in a manner that gives effect to the requirements of section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002; and

b.         that public consultation is planned for late August to late September, with public hearings around mid-October 2017.

7.         Recommends that a hearings panel hears submissions on the proposed replacement bylaw, deliberates on those submissions, and reports back to the Council on the final form of the bylaw. 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025): Activity:

Strategic Planning and  Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.19 (non-LTP) Bylaws and regulatory policies are reviewed to meet statutory timeframes and changing needs

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - Review the current bylaw and recommend an updated, replacement bylaw. Undertake public consultation on the proposed replacement bylaw.

The LGA 2002 requires that all ‘reasonably practicable options’ are assessed (section 77). In this case, only one structural option has been presented in this report – reviewing and replacing the bylaw.  This is because revoking the bylaw, or keeping the existing bylaw, are not reasonably practicable options as a result of the review. 

·    Revoking the bylaw would reduce the tools that the Council has to manage the problems identified in the review, and result in a lack of regulatory options to manage issues.

·    Keeping the existing bylaw is not a reasonably practicable option either, as improvements and alignments with current practice have been identified through the review, and it would be inadvisable to maintain the status quo when known improvements have been identified.

The Level of Service for bylaws requires reviewing them to meet changing needs.  Within the bylaw review process itself, each clause has been examined, and new issues have been identified and assessed, and this, in essence, provides the analysis of options. This analysis is attached as the ‘section 155 report’. Section 155 of the LGA 2002, which is specific to bylaws, requires an assessment of whether regulating the identified issues via bylaw is appropriate.

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.4       The advantages of this option include:

·     Meets legislative requirements for review (timeliness, analysis and consultation)

·     Updates the existing bylaw so it is fit for purpose in the current context.

4.5       The disadvantages of this option include:

·     None.

 

5.   Context/Background

Purpose and coverage of the bylaw

5.1       The movement of stock along or across rural roads is a necessary part of farming activities and, although it has not been identified as a significant or frequently occurring road safety issue in the district, it does necessarily occur to some degree from time to time.

5.2       The bylaws (current and proposed) regulate the movement of stock on roads.  There is potential for harm to road users, those droving stock, and the stock, as well as damage to the road surface, if stock movements are not undertaken with due care and best practice. 

5.3       New Zealand Transport Agency indicates that, although there are relatively low numbers of accidents involving stock under control on roads generally, the two contributing factors in related road crashes are insufficient warning distance, and inconsistent forms of warning.  The proposed replacement bylaw sets out warning distances and standard forms of warning (such as signs), following best practice guidance.

5.4       The Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) places responsibilities on a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU).  It generally requires PCBUs to take all reasonably practicable steps to eliminate, minimise or manage risk, and places responsibility on the PCBU to protect themselves and those that may be affected.  Both farmers and the Council are considered PCBUs under the HSWA and have responsibilities to manage risk.

5.5       Generally, the responsibility for farmers is to protect themselves, any staff or helpers, their stock, and any road users from coming to harm as a result of using the road to move stock. 

5.6       The Council (as the Road Controlling Authority) generally gives permission for activities on the road that follow best practice, and where the risks are adequately managed.

5.7       Existing legislation, the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004, already covers some aspects relating to animals on the road. The Rule covers driver responsibilities and conduct towards animals on the road (both driven and ridden), together with some aspects of the responsibilities and obligations of those moving untethered animals, or riding or leading animals, along or across roads (parts 7.22, 11.14 and 11.15, respectively). The bylaws (current and proposed) do not seek to replicate this. 

5.8       The proposed replacement bylaw covers roadside grazing (and temporary fencing), and the installation, maintenance and removal of cattle-stops. It also contains some exemptions that apply during emergencies (such as fire) and extreme weather events (such as snow or flooding).

5.9       There is a greater risk from uncontrolled stock on roads (such as escaped or wandering animals) than from stock that are being driven along or across a road in a controlled way, and the proposed replacement bylaw also seeks to complement the coverage of the Impounding Act 1955 in this regard.  It contains a new provision on keeping boundary fences in good condition so that they adequately confine stock and do not allow animals to escape onto roads.

Review of the current bylaw

5.10    The Council has a bylaw regulating activities associated with the stock on roads – the Stock Control Bylaw 2008. Legislation requires that bylaws are reviewed within certain timeframes –normally at least once every ten years (section 159 of the LGA 2002). The review concludes that a bylaw is still needed and a proposed replacement bylaw has been drafted – the proposed Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017 (attachment A).

5.11    When a council reviews a bylaw it is required to determine whether that bylaw is appropriate – through a section 155 analysis, as set out in section 160 of the LGA 2002. The first part of this analysis requires establishing what problems (actual and perceived) exist. The next part requires determining whether or not a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the problems. In practice, this is established by undertaking a clause-by-clause analysis of the current bylaw, and then identifying and assessing potential new problems, or areas that might benefit from regulation via bylaw.  The final part of the analysis is to determine whether or not the bylaw gives rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBoRA). The section 155 analysis is attached to this report (Attachment B). 

5.12    Section 160 goes on to provide that, if a council considers that a bylaw should be amended, revoked, or revoked and replaced, as a result of reviewing it, the council must consult on the proposed bylaw in accordance with section 156 of the LGA 2002.

5.13    When the replacement bylaw (in its final form, after consultation) is considered by Council, the report will also seek to revoke:

·   the Banks Peninsula District Council Wandering Stock Signs Policy 1990; and

·   section 5.2 (Cattlestops and Gates) of the Banks Peninsula District Council Roading Policy 1998.

5.14    A new policy on the installation, maintenance and removal of cattle-stops will be developed by staff and will complement the coverage of the proposed replacement bylaw.

Bylaw-making powers and enforcement options

5.15    The proposed new bylaw would be made under the LGA 2002 as well as the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA 1998). 

5.16    Sections 145 and 146 of the LGA 2002 :

·   section 145(a): protecting the public from nuisance; and (b) protecting, promoting, and maintaining public health and safety

·   section 146(b)(vi) … managing, regulating against, or protecting from, damage, misuse, or loss, or for preventing the use of… infrastructure associated with… land under the control of the territorial authority.

5.17    The proposed new replacement bylaw would also be made under the LTA 1998, section 22AB, including:

·   Section 22AB(1)(u): prohibiting the driving of loose horses, cattle, sheep, pigs, or other animals along any road, otherwise than at the times and by the routes so prescribed, except with the permission of the Minister or of the relevant road controlling authority, as the case may be, and on the conditions that the Minister or the relevant road controlling authority, as the case may be, thinks fit:

·   22AB(1)(zk): regulating any road-related matters not addressed by paragraphs (a) to (zj), including (but not limited to) enhancing or promoting road safety or providing protection for the environment.

5.18    The parts of the proposed replacement bylaw made under the LGA 2002 would have the same penalties and enforcement provisions as the current bylaw (namely, a fine on conviction of up to $20,000, as set out in section 242 of the LGA 2002). 

5.19    There is no infringement regime available at this time for breaching a bylaw made under the LGA 2002. However, there is a range of enforcement options and tools available in that Act (for example, seizing offending equipment, applying for injunctions in the District Court, or recovering costs from damage). Council enforcement officers may enforce the bylaw using these tools.

5.20    The parts of the proposed replacement bylaw made under the LTA 1998 may be enforced by enforcement officers appointed under the LTA 1998. In this context, enforcement officers are members of the Police. However, the infringement regime only applies with respect to vehicles, and staff consider that in most cases, breaches of the bylaw will be directly related to the control of stock by the stock owner rather than the use of vehicles. If the Police bring a prosecution under the LTA 1998, on conviction there is a maximum fine of $500.

Coverage and exclusions

5.21    The proposed replacement bylaw would apply to all roads where the Council is the Road Controlling Authority. 

5.22    The proposed replacement bylaw would not apply to:

·   roads where the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) is the Road Controlling Authority, such as State Highways (except where the NZTA has delegated its functions and powers as a Road Controlling Authority to the Council); or

·   private roads, unformed roads and roads that are not maintained by the Council; or

·   stock that is being transported in a vehicle, or that is being ridden or led.

5.23    Some requirements in the bylaw do not apply to roads or sections of unfenced road where there are cattle-stops and stock are able to wander freely over the road (and where there is signage to warn road users of this). There is also some flexibility in emergency conditions and extreme weather events, where the welfare of stock is threatened.

Best practice guidance

5.24    Information for the best practice guidance in the proposed replacement bylaw is from a several sources, including:

·   The Road Controlling Authorities (RCA) Forum document, produced in conjunction with New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), Stock under control (crossing and droving), produced in April 2015, which sets out best practice for stock-related warning distances and forms of warning.

·   The Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM), which sets out best practice generally for all forms of temporary traffic management across New Zealand.

Changes between the current bylaw and the proposed new bylaw

5.25    Detailed information on the review of the current bylaw is in the attached section 155 analysis.  This analysis evaluates each clause in the current bylaw, and then identifies new issues and explores whether regulation via bylaw is appropriate.

5.26    Information and evidence for the clause-by-clause and issues analysis was sought from staff with operational involvement in traffic operations and roading maintenance, and animal management, as well as the Christchurch Transport Operations Centre (CTOC).  All Community Boards were involved in the review, particularly the Banks Peninsula Community Board.

5.27    In summary, the changes from the current bylaw are:

·   Standard conditions for moving stock along or across roads – these standard conditions have had some minor changes, including high visibility clothing, not placing any obstruction on a road to control or direct stock, avoiding anticipated busy times on roads, and not moving stock in reduced visibility conditions.

·   Standard conditions for moving stock across roads – the use, type and location of signs, and the optional use of flashing amber beacons.

·   Standard conditions for moving stock along roads – requirements for pilot vehicles, including distances from the stock, and the use of signs and flashing amber beacons.

·   Temporary roadside fencing – requires the permission of the Council, covers temporary stock races, and requires temporary fencing to have frangible posts and not be located within two metres of a waterway.  The other fencing conditions remain the same.

·   Movement of dairy cows - the section setting out the conditions for the movement of dairy cows has been removed.  All movements of dairy cattle now come under the clause on assessments (see below).

5.28    The new areas of coverage for the proposed replacement bylaw are:

·   Restricted roads – a new approach to managing stock on roads has been added, where roads, sections or categories of road are listed in a Restricted Roads Register. These roads are associated with higher risks for the movement of stock.  A person must apply for an assessment before moving stock on these roads. Staff will table a draft Restricted Roads Register at the Committee meeting on 26 July.

·   Assessments – a new approach to managing risk has been added, where for the movement of stock on Restricted Roads, or for the movement of dairy cattle or non-standard stock, an assessment is required on a case-by-case basis to ascertain the specific risks and appropriate risk mitigation measures.  This may result in a permit with conditions or the need for a traffic management plan.

·   Non-standard stock - This term has been used to describe stock that are not cattle or sheep, and where there are different risks to be managed. Different requirements are also in place for dairy cattle. The use of any road for both non-standard stock and dairy cattle requires an assessment, as above.

·   Cattle-stops – Although there is some regulatory coverage relating to cattle-stops in the Local Government Act 1974 that is still in force (section 344), there are issues that remain unclear or discretionary. The inclusion of a clause prohibiting the installation, maintenance or removal of cattle-stops without the permission of the Council will be accompanied by a policy that is connected with the bylaw (but is not part of the bylaw) that sets out relevant matters.

·   Escaped or wandering stock – a new clause has been added to require every person who owns stock to take all reasonable steps to prevent the stock from wandering on roads, including ensuring fences are able to adequately contain the stock.

·   Contamination of or damage to the road surface – a new clause has been included setting out that the Council can direct the owner of stock to clean the road surface of mud or faeces to its satisfaction, or will clean the road and recover costs from the stock owner. Similarly, the Council may repair any damage caused to a road and recover the costs from the stock owner. 

5.29    There are no substantial changes to the coverage of:

·   Many of the standard conditions for moving stock along or across roads remain the same.

5.30    The proposed replacement bylaw is attached to this report.  The clause-by-clause and issues analysis (section 155) report is also attached, and sets out all the clauses in the current bylaw, the reason for any changes, and the wording in the proposed replacement bylaw in more detail.

Relationship with other Council bylaws

5.31    The proposed replacement bylaw has some minor some overlaps with proposed new Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017, in that they both relate to roads. There are no inconsistencies between the bylaws.

Consultation process on the proposed replacement bylaw

5.32    The LGA 2002 requires councils to consult the public on new bylaws and bylaw amendments using either the special consultative procedure (sections 83 and 86) or 'other' consultation (section 82). For proposals of low to medium significance (this includes situations where the Council considers that there is not or there is not likely to be a significant impact on the public), section 82 'other' consultation is generally considered appropriate. When carrying out consultation that gives effect to the requirements of section 82, the Council must comply with the requirements of section 82A (which relates to information required for consultation). 

5.33    Staff recommend that the Council follow a similar process to a special consultative procedure, with more user friendly, simple documents. The proposed consultation process will include:

·   public notices in relevant newspapers; and

·   sending a summary of the proposed changes and bylaw to identified stakeholders, inviting written comments; and

·   making copies available on the website and in libraries for anyone with an interest; and

·   holding public hearings. 

5.34    Consultation is scheduled for late August to late September, with public hearings mid-October 2017. The Council should be able to consider the final form of the bylaw in November, with the replacement bylaw coming to force in December.


 

6.   Option 1 - Recommend the proposed replacement bylaw for public consultation (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Review the current bylaw and recommend an updated, replacement bylaw. Undertake public consultation on the proposed replacement bylaw.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       This report concerns the adoption of a proposed replacement bylaw for public consultation.  Views will be sought through the public consultation process.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.5       This option is largely consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, and Community Outcomes.

6.6       There will be some policy amendments or revocations necessary if the replacement bylaw is adopted. Notably,

·   the revocation of the Banks Peninsula District Council Wandering Stock Signs Policy 1990, and section 5.2 (Cattlestops and Gates) of the Banks Peninsula District Council Roading Policy 1998; and

·   the development of an operational policy on the installation, maintenance and removal of cattle-stops.

Financial Implications

6.7       Public consultation and hearings on the proposed replacement bylaw are business as usual costs. 

6.8       There will be some cost implications for stock owners wanting to use the road to move stock under the proposed replacement bylaw. 

6.9       The requirements in the bylaw align with the requirements in the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 to some degree, meaning some of the equipment required by the bylaw may already be being utilised to meet those legislative requirements.  The HSWA requires taking all reasonably practicable steps to eliminate, minimise or manage risk, and places responsibility on the business operator to protect themselves and those that may be affected.

6.10    Costs for those moving stock along or across roads may include:

Item         

Cost indication / estimate

Total cost estimate

High viz vests (per person)

$20 +gst

$23 per vest

Amber beacons - different types

(need x2 for pilot vehicles)

Ranging from $50 - $300 +gst

$57.50 - $345 per beacon

Temporary warning sign – orange with a cow or sheep silhouette

(may need several signs)

Sign only $95+gst

$109.25 per sign

Vehicle mounted, towball mount $250+gst

$287.50 per sign + mount

Foldable sign + post $290+gst

(installation extra)

$333.50 per sign + post

Sign stand and base $175+gst  

$201.25 per sign + stand

 

6.11    The costs for amber beacons and temporary warning signs are largely one-off costs, as the equipment should last for many years if it is well cared for.

6.12    Traffic management plans may be one-off or for a series of events. However, they are only valid for a maximum of one year.

Item         

Cost indication

Total cost estimate

Traffic Management Plan

$140+gst TMP design (assuming relatively simple and easy to produce)

$161

 

Legal Implications

6.13    The legal considerations relating to a review have been identified in paragraphs 5.10 to 5.12 of this report.

6.14    In addition to these considerations, the law requires that any bylaw must be intra vires (within the statutory powers that authorise the bylaw), certain and reasonable. There is a considerable body of case law on ‘reasonableness’ in the bylaw context. The Courts have noted that in ascertaining the reasonableness of a bylaw, they will look to the surrounding facts, including the nature and condition of the locality in which it is to take effect, the problem it seeks to solve or proposes to remedy, and whether public or private rights are unnecessarily or unjustly affected.

6.15    The Legal Services Unit has considered both the section 155 analysis, as well as the proposed new bylaw. It is the view of the Legal Services Unit that the proposed replacement bylaw is within the authorising provisions of the LGA 2002 and the LTA 1998, and is certain and reasonable. It is also the view of the Legal Services Unit that the attached section 155 analysis report shows how the Council has considered its section 155 obligations for the purposes of the review of the bylaw (together with assessing options under section 77 of the LGA 2002 in relation to the various clauses). 

6.16    In addition, the review prepared by staff lead to the conclusion that other options such as ‘do nothing’ or ‘retain the current bylaw without amendment’ were not reasonably practicable options. On this basis the Legal Services Unit consider that the Council has correctly identified one reasonably practicable option which is to replace the current bylaw with a new bylaw. 

6.17    The recommendations in this report reflect that the requirements in section 155 and 160 of the LGA 2002 have been met.

Risks and Mitigations   

6.18    The risks of consulting on and then adopting some form of the proposed replacement bylaw are low. The consultation process will allow the public to have their say on the proposal.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed Stock on Roads Bylaw 2017

21

b

Section 155 and clause by clause analysis

32

 

 


 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Teena Crocker - Senior Policy Analyst

Vivienne Wilson - Senior Solicitor

Andrew Hensley - Traffic Engineer

Approved By

Helen Beaumont - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

8.        Review of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 and Speed Limits Bylaw 2010, and proposed new Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 (for consultation)

Reference:

17/730590

Contact:

Ruth Littlewood

Ruth.littlewood@ccc.govt.nz

941 5574

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Regulatory Performance Committee to consider the review of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 and Speed Limits Bylaw 2010, and to recommend the proposed replacement bylaw (Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017) to Council for adoption for public consultation.

Origin of Report

1.2       The Council has an agreed ten-year timetable for coordinating the review of bylaws. The review of these bylaws ensures these reviews will comply with legislative review requirements under Section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.2       Staff recommend that the consultation process for the replacement bylaw follows the special consultative procedure under the LGA, including public notification of the bylaw, written submissions and a public hearing.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Regulatory Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Notes that:

a.         this report relates to the reviews of both the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking 2008, and the Christchurch City Council Speed Limits Bylaw 2010 (the current bylaws)

b.         the review of the current bylaws has resulted in the development of a draft replacement bylaw (incorporating the speed limits bylaw): the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017

c.         in order to complete the reviews, Council needs to approve the replacement bylaw and to consult the public on the proposed replacement bylaw.

2.         Receives the attached section 155 analysis report (Attachment A).

3.         Commences the special consultative procedure in relation to the proposed draft bylaw in Attachment B and notes that subject to any changes as a result of the consultation process the proposed replacement bylaw meets the requirements of section 155 of the Act, in that:

a.         a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems; and

b.         the proposed bylaw (subject to the outcome of the consultation process) is the most appropriate form of bylaw; and

c.         the proposed bylaw gives rise to some implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 but is not inconsistent with that Act.

4.         Adopts:

a.         a ‘statement of proposal‘ and that the consultation process will give effect to the consultation requirements of section 83 of the Act and

b.         that public consultation is planned for late August to late September, with public hearings around mid-October 2017.

5.         Recommends that a hearings panel hears submissions on the proposed replacement bylaw, deliberates on those submissions, and reports back to the Council on the final form of the bylaw. 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       The Act requires that all bylaws are reviewed periodically to ensure that they remain fit for purpose.  In terms of assessing options, each bylaw clause has been examined, and new issues have been identified and assessed, and this, in essence, provides the analysis of options. This analysis is contained in the ‘section 155 report’ (Attachment A).

4.2       The review of the current bylaws is intended to make the Council’s traffic, parking and speed limit controls more effective, easier to administer and enforce, and to reflect current circumstances.

4.3       Some of the changes in the proposed replacement bylaw reflect changes in legislation and legal interpretation. Currently some offences (e.g. breaches of heavy vehicle movement restrictions) can be enforced only by way of a prosecution in the District Court, whereas enforcement officers will be able to issue infringement notices (instant fines) under the proposed bylaw for these offences. The proposed replacement bylaw removes the schedules and retains the relevant information in registers. This removes duplication and improves processes for updating the information.

4.4       The proposed bylaw also takes into account changes to the practice of traffic management and to street design; for example the proposed bylaw provides for shared zones and paths (clauses 19 and 20) and for the new ‘hard’ landscaping on inner city streets (clause 11).  Table 1 of Attachment A includes an outline of each of the new bylaw clauses and describes the amendments made to the current bylaw clauses together with the rationale for these changes.

4.5       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025):

4.5.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and  Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.19 Bylaws and regulatory policies are reviewed to meet statutory timeframes and changing needs

4.6       The following feasible options have been considered:

·    Option 1 - Review the current bylaws and recommend an updated, replacement bylaw. Undertake a special consultative procedure on the proposed replacement bylaw.

The LGA 2002 requires that all ‘reasonably practicable options’ are assessed (section 77). In this case, only one structural option has been presented in this report – reviewing and replacing the bylaws.  This is because revoking the bylaws, or keeping the existing bylaws, are not reasonably practicable options as a result of the review. 

·    Technically the Council must have a speed limits bylaw to set certain speed limits in the district.

·    Revoking the bylaws would also reduce the tools that the Council has to manage the problems identified in the review, and result in a lack of regulatory options to manage issues.

·    Keeping the existing bylaws is not a reasonably practicable option either, as improvements and alignments with current practice have been identified through the review, and it would be inadvisable to maintain the status quo when known improvements have been identified.

The Level of Service for bylaws requires reviewing them to meet changing needs.  Within the bylaw review process itself, each clause has been examined, and new issues have been identified and assessed, and this, in essence, provides the analysis of options. This analysis is attached as the ‘section 155 report’. Section 155 of the LGA 2002, which is specific to bylaws, requires an assessment of whether regulating the identified issues via bylaw is appropriate.

4.7       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

The advantages of this option include:

·    Meets legislative requirements for review (timeliness, analysis and consultation)

·    Updates the existing bylaw so it is fit for purpose.

There are no identified disadvantages of this option. 

 

 

5.   Context/Background

Purpose and coverage of the bylaw

5.1       Currently the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 regulates and controls traffic and parking, balancing the competing demands on the road space while maintaining a safe and efficient infrastructure. The Speed Limits Bylaw 2010 allows the Council to set the speed limits, or designate urban traffic areas on roads under its jurisdiction.

Review of the current bylaw and clause by clause analysis of the replacement bylaw

5.2       The proposed replacement bylaw is attached to this report. The clause-by-clause and issues analysis (section 155) report is also attached. This analysis evaluates each clause in the current bylaw, the reason for any changes, and then identifies new issues, explores whether regulation via bylaw is appropriate and sets out the proposed changes and rationale for the replacement bylaw clauses. 

5.3       Information and evidence for the clause-by-clause and issues analysis was sought from staff with operational involvement in traffic operations, asset protection, parking compliance, as well as the Christchurch Transport Operations Centre (CTOC). All Community Boards were consulted on the review.

Relationship with other Council bylaws

5.4       The proposed replacement bylaw has some minor overlaps with the Parks and Reserves Bylaw 2016. There are no inconsistencies between the bylaws, and a consequential amendment to the Parks and Reserves Bylaw is proposed.

Consultation process on the proposed replacement bylaw

5.5       The Act requires councils to consult the public on new bylaws and bylaw amendments using either the special consultative procedure (sections 83 and 86) or 'other' consultation (section 82).  For proposals of low to medium significance, section 82 'other' consultation is generally considered appropriate.  However Staff recommend that the Council follow a special consultative procedure given the wide ranging nature of these reviews. The proposed consultation process will include: public notices in relevant newspapers; sending a statement of proposal including summary of the proposed changes and proposed bylaw to identified stakeholders, inviting written comments; and making copies available on the website and in libraries for anyone with an interest; and holding public hearings. 

5.6       Consultation is scheduled for late August to late September, with public hearings around mid-October 2017. The Council should be able to consider the final form of the bylaw in November, with the replacement bylaw coming to force in December.

6.   Option 1 -  recommend the proposed replacement bylaw for public consultation (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Review the current bylaws – Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008 and Speed Limits Bylaw 2010 – and recommend an updated, replacement Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017. Undertake public consultation on the proposed replacement bylaw.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

This report concerns the adoption of a proposed replacement bylaw for public consultation.  Views will be sought through the public consultation process.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.4       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies, and Community Outcomes.

6.5       There will be some policy amendments or revocations necessary if the replacement bylaw is adopted. Notably:          

6.5.1      The revocation of the Christchurch City Council Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2008; and

6.5.2      The revocation of the Christchurch City Council Speed Limits Bylaw 2010.

Financial Implications

6.6       Public consultation and hearings on the proposed replacement bylaw are business as usual costs.

Legal Implications

6.7       The Legal Services Unit has considered both the section 155 analysis, and the proposed new bylaw.  It is the view of the Legal Services Unit that the proposed replacement bylaw is within the authorising provisions of the LGA 2002 and the Land Transport Act 1998, and is certainly reasonable.  It is also the view of the Legal Services Unit that the attached section 155 analysis report shows how the Council has considered its section 155 obligations for the purposes of the review of the bylaw (together with assessing options under section 77 of the Act in relation to the various clauses). 

6.8       In addition, the review prepared by staff led to the conclusion that other options such as ‘do nothing’ or ‘retain the current bylaw without amendment’ were not reasonably practicable options.  On this basis the Legal Services Unit consider that the Council has correctly identified one reasonably practicable option which is to replace the current bylaw with a new bylaw. 

6.9       The recommendations in this report reflect the requirements of section 155 and 160 of the Act, as well as section 22AD of the Land Transport Act 1998.

Risks and Mitigations   

6.10    The risks of consulting on and then adopting some form of the proposed replacement bylaw for are low. The consultation process will allow the public to have their say on the proposal.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017 section 155 and clause by clause analysis

56

b

Draft Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2017

75

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Authors

Libby Elvidge - Policy Analyst

Ruth Littlewood - Senior Policy Analyst

Approved By

Helen Beaumont - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

9.        Review of the General Bylaw 2008

Reference:

17/139263

Contact:

Ruth Littlewood

Ruth.littlewood@ccc.govt.nz

941-5574

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is for the Regulatory Performance Committee to recommend to the Council that it consult the general public on proposed amendments to the Council's 2008 General Bylaw.

Origin of Report

1.2       The Council has an agreed ten-year timetable for co-ordinating the review of bylaws.  This report has been prepared to ensure that the review will comply with legislative requirements.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decisions in this report are of low significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.  The community engagement and consultation outlined in this report reflect this assessment.

 

3.   Staff Recommendations

That the Regulatory Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         In relation to its review of the Christchurch City Council General Bylaw 2008:

a.         Determines that amending the 2008 General Bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing any problems with the bylaw; and

b.         That the amended 2008 General Bylaw (Attachment A) is considered to be the most appropriate form of bylaw; and

c.         Does not give rise to implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and is not inconsistent with the NZBORA.

2.         Publicly notifies the proposal to amend the General Bylaw.

3.         Recommends that a hearings panel hears submissions on the proposed amended bylaw, deliberates on those submissions, and reports back to the Council on the final form of the bylaw. 

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025):

4.1.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and  Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.19 Bylaws and regulatory policies are reviewed to meet statutory timeframes and changing needs

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 - to amend the General Bylaw 2008 (preferred option)


 

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     The General Bylaw sets out the administration clauses common to all Council bylaws – having a general bylaw is more efficient and effective than repeating identical clauses in each bylaw. 

·     Updates the General Bylaw to take into account changing circumstances and legislation e.g. by providing for the electronic service of documents.

·     Removes provisions which are covered by the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) – for example clause 14 ‘Names and addresses to be supplied’ is not required because section 178 of the LGA empowers enforcement officers to require people to give their name and address.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     There are no identified disadvantages.

 

5.   Context/Background

5.1       The Council's General Bylaw 2008 is purely an administrative and technical bylaw.  It contains provisions that are common to all Council bylaws and applies to all present and future bylaws. 

5.2       This review is being undertaken to meet the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) to review periodically all bylaws.  Staff have analysed the General Bylaw and completed a 'Section 155 report' on the bylaw (Attachment B).

6.   Option 1 – Amend the General Bylaw 2008(preferred)

Option Description

6.1       To amend the General Bylaw for public consultation.

Significance

6.2       The level of significance of this option is low consistent with section 2 of this report.  It is proposed that this bylaw review will be publicly notified at the same time as the reviews of the Traffic and Parking and Stock Control bylaws and that the submissions and hearings process will happen concurrently.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

6.4       Because of the purely administrative role of the bylaw staff have not identified any members of the community who would be affected or have a specific interest in the bylaw.  However the staff recommend that the review is publicly notified so that those people who do have an interest in the bylaw can make submissions on the review and be heard on their views.

6.5       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

6.6       The cost of reviewing the bylaws is covered by existing budgets.

Legal Implications

6.7       None identified.  The legal services unit has drafted the amendments to the bylaw.

Risks and Mitigations

6.8       There are no identified risks in amending the bylaw.  The amendments are drafted to ensure that the bylaw remains fit for current and future circumstances.

Implementation

6.9       Not Applicable.

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.10    The advantages of this option include:

·   The general bylaw is updated to meet current and future requirements

6.11    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   None identified

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed General Bylaw (amendments for consultation)

94

b

S155 report-General Bylaw amendments

100

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Ruth Littlewood - Senior Policy Analyst

Approved By

Helen Beaumont - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

10.    Easter Sunday Trading Hours

Reference:

17/518567

Contact:

Claire Bryant

claire.bryant@ccc.govt.nz

941 8876

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide advice to the Regulatory Performance Committee on options related to Easter Sunday retail trading and make a recommendation on the preferred approach.

Origin of Report

1.2       This report is staff generated in response to recent central government changes to the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Act 2016 (the Act).  The Act provides territorial authorities with the powers to adopt a policy that enables all retail shops, in part or all of the District, to trade on Easter Sunday.

2.   Significance

2.1       The decision in this report is of medium significance in relation to the Christchurch City Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

2.1.1   The level of significance was determined by the potential cost and possible social and cultural impacts of a policy. 

2.1.2   The community engagement and consultation (via the 2017 Residents Survey) outlined in this report reflect the assessment. 

 

3.   Staff Recommendations 

That the Regulatory Performance Committee recommends that the Council:

1.         Agrees not to investigate an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy, at this time.

2.         Requests staff to maintain a watching brief for public expressions of interest in having a policy and, if support does emerge, to report back to the Regulatory Performance Committee with further options.

 

4.   Key Points

4.1       This report supports the Council's Long Term Plan (2015 - 2025):

4.1.1   Activity: Strategic Planning and  Policy

·     Level of Service: 17.0.9 Provision of strategic advice on the social and economic issues facing the city

4.2       The following feasible options have been considered:

·     Option 1 – do not investigate an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy and maintain a watching brief. (preferred option)

·     Option 2 –investigate an Easter Sunday shop trading policy for Banks Peninsula.


 

4.3       Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages (Preferred Option)

4.3.1   The advantages of this option include:

·     The majority (albeit a small majority) of city-wide residents surveyed do not want an Easter Sunday Trading policy.

·     If significant interest in having Easter Sunday trading does emerge over time, there are no barriers to staff then undertaking policy investigations, as appropriate.

·     It is a lower cost option than investigating a policy, as the Act requires a policy be adopted using the special consultative procedure.

4.3.2   The disadvantages of this option include:

·     It does not provide for the one Community Board area (Banks Peninsula) where surveyed residents marginally support having an Easter Sunday Trading policy.

 

5.   Context/Background

Legislative context

5.1       Territorial authorities now have the power to adopt an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy under the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Act 2016 (the Act). 

5.2       If adopted, a new policy would permit all retail shops, in part or all of the District, to open and trade on Easter Sunday.  Shops must continue to be closed on Anzac Day morning, Good Friday and Christmas Day.

5.3       The enforcement of any new policy is the responsibility of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE).

5.4       The Act does not allow a new Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy to limit the territorial authority’s power under any other enactment, such as liquor licensing provisions.

5.5       The Act already allows retailers located at the Christchurch Arts Centre to trade on Easter Sunday.  The Act also already allows many specific types of retailers to trade including garden centres, pharmacies, souvenirs and shops selling only prepared food, or daily necessities that people living in the area may reasonably need to be able to buy at any time.  If a policy was adopted the additional retailers enabled to trade would largely be department stores and shops in malls.

5.6       If a territorial authority wishes to adopt an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy the Act requires that the special consultative procedure be used to adopt the draft policy. 

Community consultation

5.7       Over March 2017 a sample of 770 residents were asked if they agree that all retail shops should be open for trade on Easter Sunday  as part of the General Service Satisfaction Survey which is conducted  every year as part of the Christchurch City Council's Residents Survey.  The respondents were Christchurch District residents who have lived in the city for at least 12 months and who are aged 18 years and over.

5.8       At the city-wide level, 34 percent of residents agreed that all retail shops should be open on Easter Sunday and 51 percent of residents disagreed. This supports the preferred option of waiting to see if more support for a policy emerges over time.  

5.9       However, at the local level in one Board (Banks Peninsula), marginally more residents (38.5%) agreed with the statement that all retail shops should be open for trade than disagreed (30.8%) and a further third (30.8%) neither agreed nor disagreed. This support for Easter Sunday trading in Banks Peninsula is similar to other areas with high numbers of visitors over Easter. As many retailers (see 5.5 above) may already open, this may also reflect low awareness and/ or inherent complexity in the terms of the Act.

5.10    The council (as of 2 February 2017) has received 3 letters from faith-based organisations asking the Council not to adopt a policy. 

What other territorial authorities are doing  

5.11    A staff survey of territorial authorities in January 2017 received the following responses from forty Councils (60 percent):

·   13 have, or are in the process of adopting, an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy for Easter 2017.  These are generally Councils with high levels of visitor numbers over the Easter holiday.

·   7 are planning to adopt a policy in 2018

·   5 have decided not to develop a policy

·   15 have not yet decided.

 

5.12    In the immediate surrounds of Christchurch District – Hurunui, Waimakariri, Selwyn and Timaru Councils will not have a policy in place for Easter 2017.  Kaikoura District Council’s public consultation on a draft policy closed on 3 March 2017 but, at the time of this report, the results have not been to a Council meeting, so they may or may not adopt a policy for 2017.

6.   Option 1 – Do not investigate an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy at this time (preferred)

Option Description

6.1       Do not investigate an Easter Sunday Trading Hours policy at this time.  However, if significant expressions of support for a policy do emerge (such as from the Residents Survey in the field over February- March, or from malls or retailer associations), staff will report to Council with draft policy options for future Easter Sunday trading (potentially taking effect in 2018).

Significance

6.2       The level of significance for this option is low which differs from section 2 of this report because should community preference for a policy emerge, staff will report to Council with further options.   

6.3       The engagement requirements for this level of significance have been met through the 2017 Residents Survey, and letters received to date.

Impact on Mana Whenua

6.4       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

6.5       Please see 5.7 – 5.10 above.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

6.6       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies

Financial Implications

6.7       Cost of Implementation – n/a

6.8       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – n/a

6.9       Funding source – n/a

Legal Implications

6.10    As the Act is an enabling Act there is no requirement to investigate or adopt a policy and this option has no legal implications for the Council.

Risks and Mitigations    

6.11    The risk of not investigating a policy now is that it may result in work later if it becomes apparent over time that the community do want a policy. 

6.11.1 Treatment: Given that many retailers, including tourism-related retailers, may already be open and pending any conclusive demonstration of community preferences this report recommends option one including a watching brief for changes in community preferences.

6.11.2 Residual risk rating: low.

Implementation

6.12    Implementation dependencies  - n/a

6.13    Implementation timeframe – n/a

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

6.14    The advantages of this option include:

·   The majority (albeit a small majority) of surveyed city-wide residents do not want an Easter Sunday Trading policy.

·   If significant interest in having Easter Sunday trading does emerge over time, there are no barriers to staff then undertaking policy investigations, as appropriate.

·   It is a lower cost option than investigating a policy, as the Act requires a policy is adopted using the special consultative procedure.

6.15    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   It does not provide for the one Community Board area (Banks Peninsula) where there is marginal resident support for an Easter Sunday Trading policy.

 

7.   Option 2 – investigate an Easter Sunday shop trading policy (for Banks Peninsula).

Option Description

7.1       The Shop Trading Hours Amendment Act 2016 enables Territorial Authorities to adopt an Easter Sunday Trading Policy which permits all retail shops in part of the District to open and trade on Easter Sunday. This option will develop a draft policy for Council consideration that permits all retail shops in Banks Peninsula to trade on Easter Sunday (in time for Easter 2018).

Significance

7.2       The level of significance of this option is medium consistent with section 2 of this report. 

Impact on Mana Whenua

7.3       This option does not involve a significant decision in relation to ancestral land or a body of water or other elements of intrinsic value, therefore this decision does not specifically impact Ngāi Tahu, their culture and traditions.

Community Views and Preferences

7.4       As noted above 38.5 percent of surveyed Banks Peninsula residents want Easter Sunday trading compared to 30.8 percent who do not.

Alignment with Council Plans and Policies

7.5       This option is consistent with Council’s Plans and Policies.

Financial Implications

7.6       Cost of Implementation – policy development, special consultative procedure, Hearings Panel, submissions analysis and report drafting is estimated to require between 220-250 staff hours.

7.7       Maintenance / Ongoing Costs – n/a. The policy is enforced by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment.

7.8       Funding source – from within the existing Strategic Policy budget.

Legal Implications

7.9       As the Act specifically enables different approaches in different locations within the District, there are no legal implications for the Council.

Risks and Mitigations   

7.10    The consultation creates strong polarities within the Banks Peninsula community.  

7.10.1 Treatment: Work closely with the Community Board to establish appropriate consultation approaches.

7.10.2 Residual risk rating: low.

Implementation

7.11    Implementation dependencies - availability of staff and elected member (Community Board, Hearings Panel) resource.

7.12    Implementation timeframe – draft policy must be adopted by February 2018 to enable retailers to consult with their staff before Easter (as the Act requires).

Option Summary - Advantages and Disadvantages

7.13    The advantages of this option include:

·   It enables local preference and context i.e. high visitor numbers in Banks Peninsula over Easter.  

7.14    The disadvantages of this option include:

·   There are some cost and resource implications.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Shops Currently Able to Trade on Easter Sunday

109

b

Easter Sunday Trading 2017 General Service Satisfaction survey results

110

 


 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Claire Bryant - Team Leader Policy

Approved By

Helen Beaumont - Head of Strategic Policy

Brendan Anstiss - General Manager Strategy and Transformation

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

11.    Building Consenting Unit Update - July 2017

Reference:

17/722001

Contact:

Robert Wright

Robert.wright@ccc.govt.nz

9416263

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Regulatory Performance Committee with an update of the Building Consenting Unit of the Consenting and Compliance Group. The data relates to May and June 2017.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

         That the Regulatory Performance Committee receive the information in this report.

 

 

3.   Building Control Update

May and June in Review

The number of building consents granted in May continued the recent downward trend.  The dollar value of $218 million for May 2017, tops the $209 million of May 2016.  The lagging indicators for the service areas (processing applications, undertaking inspections and issuing code compliance certificates) are all within agreed timeframes. 

Building Consents

3.1       The agreed level of service is to grant building consents within 20 working days, with a minimum target to issue 90 per cent of building consent decisions within 19 working days.

3.2       There were 508 residential and 117 commercial consent decisions made in May and 601 residential and 113 commercial consent decisions made in June.  Of those, 98.2 per cent of the decisions were made within the 19 day target for May and 96 per cent in June.  At the end of the financial year 97.9 per cent of the building consent decisions were made within the statutory timeframe.

3.3       Please see Attachment A for the May 2017 dashboard and Attachment B for the June 2017 dashboard.

External Processing of Consents

3.4       External contractors processed 137 consents in May and 165 in June.  Of these 100 per cent were within the 20 day statutory timeframe in May and 95.7 per cent in June.  

Inspections and Scheduling 

3.5       To achieve the agreed level of service, the target is to carry out 85 per cent of building inspections within three working days of the date requested.

3.6       There were 4,277 residential inspections in May and 3,667 in June.  In May 724 commercial inspections were completed and in June 631.  Total number of inspections for May was 5,001 and 4,298 in June.  The target of completing 85 per cent within three working days of the date requested was achieved at 97 per cent for May, and 99.3 per cent in June 2017 (for the end of the financial year).

3.7       The waiting time for inspections remains at an average of three working days for residential and one day for commercial. 

Code Compliance Certificates

3.8       The agreed target is to issue 90 per cent of code compliance certificate decisions within 19 working    days. 

 

3.9       There were 733 code compliance certificate applications received in May, and 674 received in June 2017.  Of these, 99.1 per        cent of the decisions were within the 19 day target in May, and 99.5 per cent for June.

 

Estimated Value of Work

                                                                       

             Estimated value of building consents                          Number of building consent decisions made granted, for May 2017 with annual                               (residential and commercial) for May with annual comparisons to May 2014.                                        comparisons to 2014.

 

                                                                      

             Estimated value of building consents                          Number of building consent decisions made granted, for June 2017 with annual                               (residential and commercial) for June with annual comparisons to June 2014.                                        comparisons to June 2014.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Building Consenting Dashboard Report - May 2017

114

b

Building Consenting Dashboard Report June 2017

117

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Robert Wright - Head of Building Consenting

Approved By

Leonie Rae - General Manager Consenting and Compliance

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

12.    Regulatory Compliance Unit Status Report

Reference:

17/732590

Contact:

Claire Le Grice

Claire.LeGrice@ccc.govt.nz

941 5064

 

 

1.   Purpose of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide the Regulatory Performance Committee with:

1.1.1   A general update on the Unit's performance against our Key Performance Indicators across the last 2 months.

1.1.2   A snapshot of some recent regulatory compliance activities.

 

2.   Staff Recommendations

1.         That the Regulatory Performance Committee receive the information in this report.

 

3.   Performance against the Unit’s Key Performance Indicators

3.1       The following data provides a summary of how the Unit is tracking against our Key Performance Indicators for the period from 1 April 2017 and 30 May 2017.

 

Animal Management

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.1 Percent of priority 1 complaints (aggressive behaviour by dogs and wandering stock) responded to within 10 minutes

Target 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

For the months of April and May 2017 all priority 1 complaints relating to aggressive behaviour of dogs and stock wandering on roads were responded to within the 10 minute timeframe.

Month

No Complaints  Received

No Attended Within 10 Minutes

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

11

11

100%

May 2017

15

15

100%

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.14 Re-inspect properties of dogs classified as dangerous and high risk or menacing to check for compliance

Target: 98%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

All properties that house dangerous dogs were inspected in July 2016 to ensure they met all legal requirements and accordingly this target has been met for the year. There were 6 dogs classified as menacing during the April/May period. All 6 properties were checked to ensure compliance. 

 


 


Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.15 – Provide dog education programmes to community groups and schools

Target: 45 education programmes delivered into the community per annum

Performance commentary for reporting period:

For the period of April and May the team conducted 7 “Dogsmart - Bite Prevention” talks to school children. The running total for the year (to the end of May) is 37. The team delivered 3 DogSafe talks to adults. The running total for the year (to the end of May) is 19. The team also delivered 24 “Reading to dogs in libraries” sessions – the running total for the year (to the end of May) is 97.  This target has been met.

 

Compliance and Investigations

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.16 – All known earthquake waste demolition storage sites and clean fill sites inspected bi-monthly

Target: 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There are 20 sites covered by this performance indicator. The Unit’s monitoring team inspects these sites, in conjunction with the joint agency group WEMT (the Waste and Environmental Joint Management Team).  The inspections conducted by both the Unit and WEMT have met the bi-monthly frequency target.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.17 – Monitor all high risk Resource Management Act consents / permits at least once every six months

Target: 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There are currently 82 high risk resource consents that are covered by this performance indicator. The Unit’s Monitoring regime ensures that these consents are monitored once every 6 months at a minimum. Accordingly, this target is achieved.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.3 – Investigations into reports of matters that pose a serious risk to public safety are commenced within 24 hours (for Building Act and Resource Management Act matters)

Target: 100%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

During the month of April, 3 dangerous building complaints were received and 4 in the month of May. These complaints were attended within 24 hours of receipt of the complaint and the appropriate action taken.

Month

Complaints Received

Investigations initiated within 24 hours

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

3

3

100%

May 2017

4

4

100%

 


Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.6 – Investigations where non-compliances of City Plan / Resource Management Act / Building Act and bylaw breaches have been confirmed, at least one written advice regarding corrective action will be issued within 15 working days

Target: 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There were 393 non-compliances and by-law breaches confirmed across the relevant period; 393 written corrective actions were issued in relation to these non-compliances within the 15 day timeframe thus the target has been achieved.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.7 – Minimum percentage of pools inspected annually

Target: 33%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

The annual 33% target was met in December 2016, however, inspections under the new Building (Pools) Amendment Act 2016 have continued with 165 inspections in May and 250 in April.

Month

Target Inspections = 200

Number Attended

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

200

165

82.5%

May 2017

200

250

             125%

 

Alcohol Licensing

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.4 – Inspect all high risk alcohol premises at least twice per year (assessed using risk assessment methodology)

Target: 100%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

For the months of April and May, 2 high risk licensed premises were inspected. For the year to date (up to the end of May) 13 high risk premises have been assessed and 39 high risk site visits have occurred in total.

The annual target has been achieved (subject to any additional premises being assessed as high risk within the annual reporting period).

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.18 New applicants for new On/Off/Club licences attend pre-lodgement meeting to establish sufficiency of application and increase understanding of applicant's obligations in accordance with Act and its supporting regulations – Target 95%

Target: 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There have been 13 (out of 13) pre-lodgement meetings for new premises applications during the reporting period. In the year to date (up to the end of May), a total of 162 pre-lodgement meetings have taken place. This is 100% of the new applications for new licenses received. Accordingly this target has been achieved.

 

 

Environmental Health

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.21 – Investigations into reports of matters that pose a serious risk to public health are started within 24 hours (for matters such as Asbestos, P- Labs, contaminated land and Hazardous Substances and New Organisms - HSNO)

Target: 100%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There has been a low level of complaints over the relevant period. The target was met for the two complaints received.

Month

No Received

No Attended

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

                      1                     

1

100%

May 2017

1

1

100%

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.20 Noise direction notices issued immediately upon first visit and confirmation of “excessiveness”

Target: 95%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

The target has been achieved. The result shows a commitment by Council’s contractor to serving written notices in response to incidents of excessive noise.

Month

No. of Excessive Noise Incidents

No. of Directions Issued

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

88

87

98.9%

May 2017

66

65

98.5%

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.8 – Complaints in relation to excessive noise are responded to within one hour

Target: 90%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

This target has been achieved. 

Month

No Received

No Attended

Percentage Achieved

April 2017

449

414

92.2%

May 2017

376

419

89.7%

 

Food Safety

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.19 Identified non-compliant food premises to be re-inspected twice within six months

Target: 100%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

A total of 9 non-compliant food premises have been identified (up to the end of May) and each of these premises has been re-inspected twice. This target has been achieved.

 

 


Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.23 – All other Health Licences are inspected bi-annually, such as Hairdressers, Funeral Directors and Camping Grounds

Target: 100%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

A total of 314 premises require inspection in accordance with this target. 245 of these premises have been inspected in the last 2 years. The remaining 69 will be inspected before the end of the annual reporting period. This target is on track to be met.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.24 – Percentage of premises identified as needing to operate a Food Control Plan (FCP) to be registered with a Food Control Plan

Target: 50%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

The food control plan registration rate for first year of transition (ending 31 March 2017) was greater than 95%.  The total number of food control plans currently registered is 1035. It is estimated that 755 premises will need to transition by 31 March 2018 (calculated on an estimated total of 1700 premises). Accordingly the 50% target is being achieved in relation to both the short and long term registration timeframes prescribed by the Food Act 2014.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.25 Audit / verify Food Control Plans and National Programmes to the requirements of the Food Act 2014

Audit / verifications to be carried out within the statutory timeframe

Performance commentary for reporting period:

The Act requires audits and verifications to be completed within 1 month of a new premise opening and within 12 months of a business previously registered changing to a Food Control Plan. Currently we have completed 658 verifications for Template Food Control Plans within the timeframes set. There are no outstanding audits and verifications required that have not met the prescribed timeframes. Accordingly this target has been met.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.26 Investigate food safety complaints

Target: 95% of complaints have an investigation initiated within 2 days

Performance commentary for reporting period:

Complaints received are checked and actioned for response on a daily basis. This target is met accordingly.

 


 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.27 Monitor food safety and sale operations that may or may not operate under a Food Control Plan or National Programme

Target: To conduct at least one monitoring programme of food operations registered to assess compliance

Performance commentary for reporting period:

There has been no monitoring in the April/May period, however, events and markets (8 combined) were visited and checked during earlier periods. This target has been met.

 

Objective and Measure

Target

9.0.5 Inspect registered food premises once per year

Target: 75%

Performance commentary for reporting period:

At the end of May 2017 the 68% of food premises had been inspected. The 75% target will be met before the end of the annual reporting period. 

 

 

4.   Compliance Activity Snapshots

 

The Lions Tour – joint agency response to MBIE Clean Zone at AMI Stadium

 

4.1       A Clean Zone restricting trading and advertising in the proximity of AMI Stadium applied to the match between the Crusaders and the Lions. The Clean Zone was implemented by MBIE under the Major Events Management Act 2007 and applied before, during and after the match.

 

4.2       The Compliance & Investigations Team assisted MBIE with the enforcement of the Clean Zone - a great example of joint agency collaboration - which involved the patrol of areas around the Stadium, addressing unauthorised activities and advertising and also enforcing Council bylaws. 

 

Recent legislative changes - Amendment to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

 

4.3       Changes to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (‘the Act’) have been introduced relating to the display of alcohol in supermarkets and grocery stores.

3.                    

4.4       The Act previously prevented retailers from placing low-alcohol and non-alcoholic beverages in the same area (the “single alcohol” area) as regular-strength alcohol. Retailers found this confusing and it also prevented low-strength alternatives being placed alongside regular strength options. Retailers can now choose to place, promote and advertise low and non-alcoholic beer wine and mead inside or outside the single alcohol area.

 

4.5       Another amendment to the Act is proposed in relation to off-licenses being held by small grocery businesses.  Under the Act, grocery stores can hold an off-licence if the store’s principal business is the sale of food products based on sales revenue.

 

4.6       As a result of tobacco tax increases, the main source of revenue for some small grocery stores has changed to tobacco products. This can prevent those stores from being issued an off-licence.

 

4.7       This effect was unintended and the Government is making minor changes to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Regulations 2013 to exclude the tobacco tax when determining a store’s principal business.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments to this report.

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)  sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii) adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

Claire Le Grice - Principal Advisor - Regulatory Compliance

Approved By

Leonie Rae - General Manager Consenting and Compliance

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

 

13     Resource Consents Monthly Report

Reference:

17/741542

Contact:

John Higgins

john.higgins@ccc.govt.nz

941 8224

 

 

1.   Purpose and Origin of Report

1.1       The purpose of this report is to provide a monthly update to the Regulatory Performance Committee with respect to the delivery of resource consent functions. This report covers activity for the month of May 2017.

1.2       Attachment A provides graphical information relating to application numbers and performance. Key aspects of that graphical information are also discussed below.

1.3       The author will be present at the committee meeting to highlight key areas of the report and answer any questions.

 

2.    Recommendation

1.         That Regulatory Performance Committee receive the information in this report.

 

 

3.   Application Numbers

3.1       Applications received increased from 251 in April to 324 in May, an increase of 23%.   The increase was expected after April which traditionally sees lower numbers due to Easter and school holidays.  

3.2       Overall, application numbers are tracking to be around 19% lower for the financial year.  Workloads still however remain high as the unit experiences increased levels of complexity in processing applications.

3.3       No temporary accommodation applications were received or approved in May.   24 District Plan certificates were issued.

 

4.   Performance

4.1       98 per cent of applications in May were processed within the statutory timeframe. This is a decrease from the April result of 99%.   However, compliance with statutory timeframes remains high.  

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Resource Consents Monthly Report - May 2017 - Attachment A

131

 

 

Confirmation of Statutory Compliance

Compliance with Statutory Decision-making Requirements (ss 76 - 81 Local Government Act 2002).

(a) This report contains:

(i)    sufficient information about all reasonably practicable options identified and assessed in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

(ii)   adequate consideration of the views and preferences of affected and interested persons bearing in mind any proposed or previous community engagement.

(b) The information reflects the level of significance of the matters covered by the report, as determined in accordance with the Council's significance and engagement policy.

 

Signatories

Author

John Higgins - Head of Resource Consents

Approved By

Leonie Rae - General Manager Consenting and Compliance

  


Regulatory Performance Committee

26 July 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator