Agenda of Taumarere Flood Management Working Group

Taumarere Flood Management Working Group ITEM: 3.2

5 June 2018Attachment 4

Hi Joe,

Apologies for the delay, please see NZTA’s stance as to the risk of not knowing what is under the water so to provide a marker would mean that the information only shows the height of the water not that it is safe to travel.

Regards

Jacqui Hori-Hoult / Manager System Management Northland
System Design & Delivery

DDI 64 9 430 7422 / M 64 21 982 945

E jacqui.hori-hoult@nzta.govt.nz / w nzta.govt.nz

Northland Office / 1^st Floor, Walton Plaza, 4 Albert St, Whangarei 0140

Private Bag 106602, Auckland 1143

_______ _____________________________________________

From: Brian Rainford
Sent: Monday, 22 January 2018 9:08 a.m.
To: Jacqui Hori-Hoult; Charlie Prentice
Cc: Mark Newsome
Subject: RE: Draft Action Point: Markers for Floods

Jacqui and Charlie.

This matter came to light last year and I sort direction from our national office.

Their advice was clear – The Agency does not support this on safety grounds that a road is flooded and no access is safe under this circumstance.

We would be in breach of health and safety if we permitted this, and should an incident happened such as a log under water that could result in an injury, NZTA could be liable.

We should not condone the use of safehit posts for this purpose.

Kind regards

Brian Rainford

Principal Traffic & Safety Engineer

System Design & Delivery

DDI 09 928 8704

M 0274 598 021

E brian.rainford@nzta.govt.nz

SaferJourneys_Akld-Northland GREY

From: Jacqui Hori-Hoult
Sent: Friday, 12 January 2018 3:28 p.m.
To: Brian Rainford; Charlie Prentice
Subject: Draft Action Point: Markers for Floods

Hi Brian,

This came in prior to Christmas and I have advised that this is something that we would sort some guidance from our safety team and in a recent conversation with Jo from NRC that you would not be back until the 22^nd

Charlie – AT use these on their roads so any thing you can provide insight would be good. My only comment which is why we have not installed anything is that I do not know in a flood situation that the road is still under the water even with the EMP’s delineating above at times – which is a potential risk.

Regards

Jacqui Hori-Hoult / Manager System Management Northland
System Design & Delivery

DDI 64 9 430 7422 / M 64 21 982 945

E jacqui.hori-hoult@nzta.govt.nz / w nzta.govt.nz

Northland Office / 1^st Floor, Walton Plaza, 4 Albert St, Whangarei 0140

Private Bag 106602, Auckland 1143

_______ _____________________________________________

Taumarere Flood Management Working Group ITEM: 3.3

5 June 2018Attachment 2

Long Term Plan 2018-2028

Summary of Submissions

April 2018

Part one

· Changing the Structure of Rates

· Fresh and Coastal Water

· Pest Management

· Flood Infrastructure Rate

· Proposed new flood works – Awanui/Kaitāia

· Proposed new flood works – Kāeo-Whangaroa

· Proposed new flood works – Whangārei urban

· Proposed new flood works – Taumārere-Kawakawa

· Proposed new flood works – Panguru

· Proposed ongoing flood works – Kerikeri-Waipapa

Table of contents

Do you agree with our proposal to make our rates system more fair and transparent by breaking it into six core rates instead of the current two?. 3

What is your preferred option for looking after our fresh and coastal waters?. 8

What is your preferred option for protecting Northland from pests?. 21

What is your preferred option for funding flood infrastructure?. 39

What is your preferred option for the Awanui/Kaitāia flood scheme?. 49

Kerikeri - Do you agree with our proposal not to re-strike the rate and spend the reserve on this flood scheme?. 55

Kāeo-Whangaroa: Do you agree with our proposal to spend an extra $1.15M on this flood scheme?. 58

Whangārei: Do you agree with our proposal to spend an extra $1M on this flood scheme?. 61

Panguru: Do you agree with our proposal to spend $440,000 on a new flood scheme?. 63

Taumārere-Kawakawa: Do you agree with our proposal to spend $2.9M on a new flood scheme?. 66

Taumārere-Kawakawa: Do you agree with our proposal to spend $2.9M on a new flood scheme?

	% Total	% Answer	Count
Number of Responses	13.26%	-	297
Agree	6.57%	49.49%	147
Disagree	1.79%	13.47%	40
Neutral	4.91%	37.04%	110
[No Response]	86.74%	-	1,942
Total	100.00%	100.00%	2,239

Summary

Almost half of the people who responded to this question agreed with council’s proposal to spend $2.9 million on a new flood scheme. Of those that agreed, submitters acknowledged the ongoing impact of floods on people and property, and the impact on roading and therefore the economy and regional development. Comments noted the urgency of the matter, and the need for resilience. Other comments noted the impact on cycle trail users, that the works should be user pays, requested a focus on wetland creation as a tool for flooding, and asked for more consultation with the community.

Of those that disagreed with the proposal (13.5%) comments were made about deforestation and climate change, that land should have been wetlands, that the town shouldn’t have been built on a flood plain and that a new flood risk plan should be prepared in conjunction with water quality and a watershed management plan. Comments raised a lack of confidence in council’s identification of problems, questioned whether the scheme would be effective, and raised specific concern at the proposal to install channel benching at Otiria stream. There was also concern at a lack of cultural assessment, and consultation with Iwi and hapū.

Submitters who were neutral questioned whether it’s possible to improve flooding, commented that work needs to be done in conjunction with Transit, and that consideration should be given to how much people will be affected, and not all properties in the area should pay the same. There were comments about a lack of consultation, and concern that the scheme is revenue gathering.

Response: Agree
Katie Taylor	2018LTP11	Yes, if that is what is needed.
Tony Dwane Hancock Forest Management NZ Ltd	2018LTP33	If people and property require additional protection.
Darlene Turner	2018LTP84	I strongly agree with this proposal because Taumarere-Kawakawa is an area that gets impacted greatly by flood events as there are a lot of streams and rivers close by that make it dangerous to drive through. Also as a result of flood events houses are often left flooded with water entering houses. This proposal would result in the amount of water being greatly reduced.
Margaret Wikaire	2018LTP448	Yes please , our flooding issues in this community desperately need addressing and if we have to pay so be it. It is very unfortunate that NRC has not consulted in Kawakawa re this issue. You can't expect working people to come to Kaikohe or Kerikeri during the day to find out what is planned. They have just drawn their own conclusions and are therefore making uniformed decisions against the proposal. Many people are critical of NRC expertise and mapping without knowing anything about it. Please bring consultation hui to Kawakawa and another to Moerewa (held at a time when people can attend i.e. evenings) before making a decision on whether to go ahead - even if there appears to be no support from the community.. People need to be better informed.
Bronwyn Bauer-Hunt Te Rarawa Anga Mua	2018LTP569	ASAP
Gary Bramley Reconnecting Northland	2018LTP1214	Maintaining access via SH11 and SH1 is important for the Northland economy and regional development.
Hon John Carter Far North District Council	2018LTP1521	Council (FNDC) thinks Taumahere-Kawakawa should have a higher level of regional contribution and perhaps some wider Districtwide contribution, as the greatest impact is on network resilience and everyone heading south from any part of the District is impacted when flooding occurs, as is anyone entering via state highways 1 and 10.
Adrienne Tari Pou Herenga Tai Twin Coast Cycle Trail Trust	2018LTP1647	Will directly affect cycle trail users
Jane Johnston Paihia & Districts Residents & Ratepayers Association	2018LTP1763	Submitter doesn't identify a particular option but generally supports flood protection works and that council get on with leading (as efficiently as possible), getting these works into place. Submitter asks that council accelerate your planned work to protect Otiria, Moerewa and Kawakawa. As outlined above, this is not nice to have, but essential work and a core function of the NRC. Have assumed they agree. (Staff summary; please see original submission).
James McDonald	2018LTP7	upgrade but charge the affected people IE me as I have two places here
Oliver Krollmann	2018LTP10	I don't live in this area and can't comment on the proposal, but I'm willing to contribute to it with the region-wide rate
John Owens	2018LTP37	Flooding: Having been through the 2007 Kaeo floods and the ensuing debate as to the best solution, the reality was that the Regional council led mapping and engineering plan proved to be right on target. I urge the Kawakawa/Moerewa and Awanui communities to embrace the expertise the NRC has and dont waste months or years with "local opinion' stalling action. The NRC also need to acknowledge that the personnel they promote to engage with the communities is extremely important.
Annette Wynyard	2018LTP71	To a point see my comments previous.
Warren Daniel	2018LTP912	Has important regional transport implications
Andreas Kurmann Clean Waters To The Sea	2018LTP1105	Need to secure this major Far North transport link
Kristi Henare	2018LTP1131	Yes
Colin Stewart	2018LTP1658	I agree with this proposal as long as only the properties to gain from this improvement 100% fund it through their rates. I do not want to pay $58.82 a year for this through my rates!
Mischa Davis Northland Fish and Game Council	2018LTP1744	Submitter suggests that for whatever flood schemes that are invested in they would like to see a strong focus on wetland creation as a tool to manage flooding, but also on protecting wetlands from both the risks of flooding and also any the controls and measures used to control flooding. (Staff summary; please see original submission).

Response: Disagree
Carl Mather	2018LTP9	Flooding occurs because 1; forest removal allows rainfall to become floods, and 2; climate change brought about by activities such as industrial agriculture. Replant the forests.
Craig Salmon	2018LTP190	Much of this land should have been left as wetlands. We are seeing sediment build up in the Bay of Islands because of poor forestry practices and conversion of land to farming. Our "kidneys" have been destroyed - they need to be replanted.
S Forsyth	2018LTP283	Why build a town on a flood plain? Kawakawa floods - more water coming on next 10 years + - have vision for future!
Dave Lasike	2018LTP841	Can't comment on this as I don't know enough about the flood scheme. I would like to see what has been done, what needs to be done and where are the most likely affected areas. Also this spend is a lot more than other areas. Is this because of the location and junction point to the North?
Malcom Francis	2018LTP960	Submitter disagrees with the"$58.82 for benching and spillways.", and states no confidence in council's identification of problem areas, and council's prioritisation of spending in Moerewa. {Staff summary; please see original submission}
Gordon Priest	2018LTP1189	Submitter disagrees with the proposed rate increase for the Taumarere flood protection scheme, and seeks dispensation/exemption from the rate as their land contributes minimal water to the catchment. Submitter raises concerns with contributions to the Hikurangi flood scheme, and rates demands on contiguous Maori land that does not have 10 year leases, and asks the council to raise this concern with FNDC. {Staff summary; please see original submission}
Hiku Taylor-Wi Neera Otiria marae	2018LTP1234	Otiria marae is extremely concerned at NRC proposal to install channel benching at Otiria stream. This shows a lack of insight by NRC into the contributing factors of the flooding in Moerewa; the affect on the marae reservation, sites of cultural significance and adjacent properties. While NRC broadly attribute the flooding issue to climate change (which is accepted is a relevant factor), but what NRC fail to acknowledge is that the flooding situation has increasingly become volatile due to a lack or proactive maintenance of existing flood schemes e.g. raised road levels; filled in culverts. The channel proposed by NRC to reduce the impact of flood at Otiria/Moerewa will be of no consequence. Furthermore, the proposed construction of a spillway near Otiria between 2023-2028 shows just how low a priority Maori communities are in the NRC scheme given that this is at most a full decade away; and in absence of a cultural impact report - shows how low NRC values areas of cultural and historical significance. This reeks of institutional bias and privilege.
Jonnie France	2018LTP1552	User pays.
Chirs Richmond Living Waters	2018LTP1708	We disagree, as we consider that any new flood risk management plan should be prepared in conjunction with a water quality & watershed management plan, as in the Waitangi catchment. The Taumarere contributes 80% of the sediment (and nutrients) reaching BOI coastal waters from only 40% of the catchment area. Until the hills are reforested, wetlands undrained, etc, only the floodplains can trap those sediments and nutrients. New infrastructure such as bunds should be used to enhance rather than degrade floodplain functioning. The proposed works would increase sediment, nutrient and flooding problems downstream, unless suitably offset.
Lynn Masters	2018LTP1992	Charge everyone in their regions not just a few farms
Ann Martin	2018LTP36	Work within a budget using no more than 5% rate increase.
Vivienne Henderson	2018LTP54	"No" to any proposed increases in rates. Stay within NRC's current budget.
Peter Hunt	2018LTP56	User pays
Charnelle Ngawati	2018LTP93	Consult local iwi and hapu at Marae and listen to their suggestions. Previous work at Otiria particularly has just made flooding worse! Storm drainage sucks too This area will always flood. We need to look at stemming it before it reaches the valley
Brad Windust	2018LTP935	I don’t support the proposed new flood works.
Margaret Hicks	2018LTP1104	Submitter comments that it is difficult to predict how much these areas will be affected by the impact of climate change. (Staff summary; please see original submission).
Clive Roberts	2018LTP1224	Work within budget, using no more than 5% rate increase.
Avis Saunders	2018LTP1414	They don't keep it up, don't finish it.
Vonnie France	2018LTP1596	User pays.
Jackie Simkins Claud Switzer Memorial Trust	2018LTP2277	All ratepayers should contribute.

Response: Neutral or no option selected
Peter Deeming	2018LTP1032	Every one benefits, every one pays
Miriam Brooks	2018LTP102	We don't have property here so it doesn't affect us, does it? Not sure as haven't been here long. Our property is in Kaitaia and Horeke.
Graeme Giles	2018LTP369	This area has flooded many times in my life time and I question whether it is possible to improve flood management in such a low lying area.
Croydon Thompson	2018LTP655	Targeted rates for area concerned
Marg Dodds	2018LTP977	Not my area so unfamiliarity where thereâ€™s flooding.
Cliff Colquhoun CBEC	2018LTP1537	Don't agree. Same as above, what are the options to conventional digger work.
Jane Johnston Kerikeri Ratepayers Association	2018LTP1660	Submitter agrees with flood protection works, and asks the council to accelerate planned work to protect Otiria, Moerewa and Kawakawa. Submitter requests that as many locals and local businesses are employed directly in these public works as possible. Submitter considers the protection and maintenance of existing assets to be of paramount importance over any spending on any new facility or other infrastructure. {Staff summary; please see original submission}
Fiona King	2018LTP1664	Needs to be done in conjunction with Transit. A plan for the catchment is essential and should include flood free state highway.
Werner & Helen Pospiech & Sander	2018LTP861	We are ratepayers in this catchment area, who had the foresight to build on high level ground and are not affected by flooding. While we would agree to pay our 50% share with all other ratepayers in the whole region, we don't think we should be treated like those who are actually inundated by flooding, just because we live in the catchment area. This would take any incentive away for people to build and farm in a safe area and might be questionable in a legal context. We are not benefiting from the scheme, but would be penalized for just living in the same catchment area. In our opinion it is unjust to lump affected and unaffected properties together into one payment category.
Faye Irwin-Erceg	2018LTP1422	General comments: - A need for serious monitoring! - There will always be serious rain and consequent flooding - Educate the public to cope and report significant changes Need to prioritise
Roger Crowden	2018LTP2354	Re hastily drawn up flood plan at Taumarere we are expected to pay towards . There has been absolutely no consultation about this unexpected regional council directive ., a hastily convened meeting during working hours In kerikeri does not equate to consultation of any kind . Obviously taxing a few rural locals, many of whose properties are above the so called flood zone, to pay for a problem upstream sounds ridiculous and more like an excuse for a revenue gathering exercise from people who get nothing from the FNDC. So please come and TALK to and LISTEN TO the people of Taumarere many of whom have lived here a long time and have seen changes and know the geology and river patterns .Might save your clients who pay your wages some money ! I have noticed the river is running faster since dredging downstream so it might be a good idea to put some big culverts under the road on the railway side of the bridge .?

Taumarere Flood Management Working Group ITEM: 3.5

5 June 2018 Attachment 1

TAUMARERE

FLOOD MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP

Terms of Reference

Reporting to: The Northland Regional Council.

Composition: The Working Group is appointed by the Northland Regional Council and shall comprise:

One Regional Councillor appointed by the Northland Regional Council who shall be the chair of the Committee (Cr Justin Blaikie)

One Far North District Councillor as a representative of the Far North District Council (Cr Kelly Stratford)

Two (or more) tangata whenua representatives, nominated by local tangata whenua (Tui Shortland and Murray Armstrong)

One representative of the local Business community (Kevin Davidson)

One representative of the New Zealand Transport Agency (Jim Sephton)

One representative of KiwiRail (Peter Ramsay)

One representative of Bay of Islands Vintage Railway (Johnson Davis)

Six representatives of the ratepayers of the river catchments, preferably representing a geographical cross-section of the catchment ratepayers from upper catchment areas through to lower catchment areas with one from each of the following catchments:

· Kawakawa (Richard Cookson)

· Karetu (John Harawene)

· Motatau/Opahi/Matawaia (Rowena Tana)

· Otiria/Moerewa/Pokapu (Ngahau Aperira Davis)

· Waiomio (Vacant)

· Maromaku (Aaron Taikato)

And any other person that the Northland Regional Council may from time to time appoint to the committee because of their particular skills or knowledge.

Appointment of Working Group members

The Northland Regional Council shall call for nominations from the Far North District Council, iwi, local Business community, the New Zealand Transport Agency and KiwiRail for Working Group representatives. The Council shall at the same time also call for nominations for the six ratepayer Working Group representatives by way of public notice in newspapers circulating in the area.

The Northland Regional Council shall select the Working Group ratepayer representatives from nominations received based on the experience and familiarity of the nominees with Taumarere and surrounding catchment management issues. If there are insufficient nominations to fill the ratepayer positions on the Working Group, the Council shall invite appropriate landholders to join the Working Group.

Appointments will be made for a term of three years, in sequence with the local government elections, or until earlier disqualification, death or resignation. Should any of the latter three events arise, replacement appointees may be made by the Northland Regional Council.

Meeting frequency: As required, but generally on one or two occasions per year. Meetings shall be advertised in local newspapers and shall be open to the public.

Objective: To advise and make recommendations to the Northland Regional Council, on all matters pertaining to the development and implementation of the Taumarere Management Plan.

Functions: The Taumarere Flood Management Working Group is an advisory committee of the Northland Regional Council and has no delegated authority or specific powers. Its functions are to:

1. Provide a stakeholder forum for the development of policies and plans for the reduction of river flood risk within the Taumarere catchment.

2. Enable stakeholders to participate in the ongoing management of river flood risk reduction within the Taumarere catchment.

3. Facilitate communications between the Northland Regional Council, which is ultimately responsible for the development and implementation of Management Plans to reduce river flood risk, and the residents and landholders within the Taumarere catchment.

4. Advise the Northland Regional Council on all matters relating to the development and implementation of the Taumarere Management Plan.

Specific tasks will include:

1. Assisting the Northland Regional Council to develop and refine a Management Plan for the reduction of flood risk in the Taumarere catchment.

2. Reviewing the implementation and effectiveness of other measures identified in the Management Plan to reduce flood risk, including policies and rules in Regional and District Plans, controls under the Building Act, or any other methods.