Submissions to WDC Long Term Plan close today 17th April

Whaingaroa Environmental Defence Incorporated Registered no.1912150

Secretary: John Lawson, 51 Cliff St, Raglan 07 825 7866 email johnrag@vodafone.co.nz

WED is reminding everybody that submissions to Waikato District Council Long Term Plan 2015-25 are due in by 5pm today Friday 17th April and can be emailed to consult@waidc.govt.nz. John is seeking support for sending in his draft submission (see below) as a WED submission? He also says that people should feel free to use all or bits of it for your own submission.

 Submission to Waikato District Council Long Term Plan 2015-25

To consult@waidc.govt.nz

Name John Lawson

Address 51 Cliff St, Raglan

email johnrag@vodafone.co.nz

I wish to speak in support of my submission on Tuesday, 19 May at Raglan Bowling Club and ask that the following submission be fully considered.

In October 2014 Raglan Community Board Community achieved a 25% response rate (378 survey forms) in a survey which indicated that Raglan’s top five Long Term Plan priorities were –

forms	priority
237	Continued development of footpaths in Raglan
185	A heated swimming pool
158	Additional areas for parking in the CBD
143	A new footpath from Whale Bay to Manu Bay
135	Public transport – increase bus services to & from Hamilton

 

The response rate indicates that this consultation was very much welcomed by many people in Raglan. It is therefore disappointing that, despite WDC accepting minute RCB1412/06/2, neither the Long Term Plan consultation document, nor the more detailed plan approved by Council make any mention of either the survey, or its priorities, especially when Council has just adopted a Community Engagement Strategy. Communities are not going to be engaged if they see evidence that Council takes little notice of consultation. I therefore submit that the draft Long Term Plan should be amended to show clearly what action Council proposes to take to implement Raglan’s top five priorities.

The rest of this submission sets out in alphabetical order those 5 and other issues –

airfield

The airfield costs around $15,000 a year to mow. It has never been disclosed how much is collected in fees, but it is probably a lot less. Page 9 of http://waidc.govt.nz/Documents-Library/Files/Have-your-Say/Public-consultations/Proposed-Fees-and-Charges-2015-16-to-2017-18/Proposed-Fees—Charges-for-notification.aspx sets out these proposed fees –

	2014	2015	2016	2017
Wharf fishing vessel charges	1,150	1,175	1,200	1,225
Airfield casual use per day	10	10	10	10
Regular use (annual aerodrome landing fee for clubs)	585	585	585	585

It seems unfair that fishing boats have to pay so much and aero clubs so little and that the former increase, but not the latter. The fishing boats employ several local crew members and cause little disturbance to Raglan. The planes may bring in a few wealthy people who may on occasion buy art, a meal, etc, but in total probably contribute far less than the fishing boats. Unlike the boats they occupy a considerable area that could be put to more profitable use (eg expanding the campground) and create considerable noise disturbance to residents and visitors, which may well deter some from visiting Raglan. Council should do a study of the costs and benefits of these activities and set charges accordingly.

affordable housing

In 2013 Raglan’s median income was $25,000. The average household size was 2.3 people, so the median household income was $57,500. QV puts the median house price for Raglan at $413,600. Council owns pensioner housing in Huntly and Ngaruawahia, but it didn’t invest in Raglan as at that time housing was provided by the St Lazarus Trust. Council didn’t apply any restrictions, which allowed the Trust to sell its houses to fund repairs to its Auckland properties. Many elderly people have had to leave their support networks in Raglan as they couldn’t afford the housing. Council should start to invest to provide Raglan with affordable housing.

buses

Apart from bus shelters, public transport isn’t mentioned in the Long Term Plan, despite the problems with Raglan’s overcrowded bus and the not unrelated fact that Raglan voted for more buses among their top five priorities, as acknowledged in WDC’s submission to the Regional Transport Plan which read, “The Raglan service will continue to be monitored to ensure safe travel for school and commuter passengers as the demand increases. A recent resident survey has identified hat 35% of respondents consider public transport as one of the top priorities for the town. Resumption of the Sunday bus service is an option that Council would like to see considered.”

Regional Council’s response to that submission effectively says nothing will change unless WDC asks for it. It says, “any change to service levels for Raglan bus route (e.g. weekend or evening services) is contingent on the additional funding being confirmed by Waikato District Council and the NZ Transport Agency. Waikato Regional Council will work with our funding partners to assess the feasibility of a scheduled Sunday service for Raglan”.

The WDC submission showed a welcome awareness of the need for improvements, but said, “the whole package moving forward over the next thirty years will always be about the issue of affordability”. As buses only form about 1.6% of WDC’s roading budget, ‘affordability’ must be a relative term. As over 5% of WDC’s population don’t own cars, many more (almost 20% in most OECD countries) would prefer to use public transport, and better bus services was in the top 5 preferences in Raglan Community Board’s survey, I submit that bus improvements are much more ‘affordable’ than a freeze on airfield charges, traction sealing, or a $2.3m water main upgrade (see below). Raglan’s peak hour buses regularly have several people standing between Waitetuna and Hamilton, whilst the bus travels at up to 90kph on the winding road, where everyone else has to wear seat belts. Something needs to be done before there is a tragedy.

The main opportunity for change will come when Raglan bus contract is renewed in January 2017. Prior to that a survey of demand needs to be undertaken (I would be very happy to help with it). Using Survey Monkey and a news item in a WDC newsletter, it needn’t cost much, but the results would be invaluable in getting a value for money contract satisfying the aspirations of those who responded to the Community Board survey.

The 2013 Census (http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/data-tables/tables-about-a-place.aspx?request_value=24420&reportid=14&tabname=Transport) showed that in Waikato District 201 people travelled to work by public transport, but 19,809 went by other motor vehicles. That 1.01% of travel to work by public transport compares very poorly with other places. Even the USA is 6%, Christchurch is 4% and the OECD average 18.9%. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-in-figures-2009/transport-2007_oif-2009-table9-en shows 37% of Japanese journeys are by public transport and 38% in Hungary. About 2% of Raglan-Hamilton trips are by bus. To reach the OECD average, Raglan would need at least nine times as many buses. A survey would indicate more precisely how many would like to use a frequent bus, what route(s) they would use and how much they would be willing pay for them in fares or rates. Raglan has shown by its support for Xtreme Zero Waste and other environmental initiatives that it is above average in its envronmental awareness. Given a usable bus service, it’s likely that Raglan use would also be above the OECD average.

The current contract with GoBus has given very poor value for money when compared with the contracts for school buses. Therefore it is very likely that a new, more frequent service contract, could save money, by using buses which currently sit idle for most of the day, to earn more fares.

devolving powers to the community board

Thames Coromandel devolved most of its powers to community boards about 3 years ago and some other councils have longer experience of devolution. Tasman DC claim to have saved about 6% on rates by the increased efficiency. Several unsatisfactory schemes have been implemented recently without the community board even being aware of them eg Bow St jetty, Cliff St at the end of James St.

heritage

Recently Raglan has lost the 1903 Moon house on Gilmour St and the trees along Wainui Rd near near Helen Pl. Council has produced a heritage policy, but generally gives higher priority to owners rights than to protection of heritage. The LTP could provide for more help for property owners in restoring heritage and for restoration and re-use of 1 Wi Neera St, Raglan. It could also provide for a series of information boards around town to increase awareness of heritage eg like this –

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kbQyEEQ606c0YtUEF4SEFiVTA/view?usp=sharing

footpaths & walkways

A recently released survey (see page 26 of http://www.srknowledge.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Active-NZ-Survey-WEB-FINAL1.pdf) indicates why Raglan’s top 5 included footpaths and a heated pool. Walking and swimming are shown as the top activities. Seems there’s a good case for cycleways too, being shown as 4^th in the survey at 26%.

http://wams.org.nz/wams/index.aspx?extent=1749883,5793806,1793169,5820582 shows the publicly owned areas around Raglan. Many of the paper roads and esplanades are not available for walking. In 2013 $70,000 was allocated to open the paper road (Pooley’s Rd) from Wainui to Karioi, but no explanation was ever given about lack of progress. Similarly in 2014 $23,000 was allocated to walkways on Wainui Reserve, where the few signposts remaining are almost illegible and a gate was recently locked and not replaced by a stile. It seems the $23,000 hasn’t been spent. In 2011 $64,137 was earmarked for the Whale Bay to Wainui Reserve walkway and $81,121 for other Raglan walkways. Very little of these sums have ever been spent.

21m km pa are cycled in Waikato (http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/tmif/transport-volume/tv014/) and 28m walked (http://www.transport.govt.nz/ourwork/tmif/transport-volume/tv018/), but 2,094m covered in motor vehicles. To improve health, reduce parking problems and, above all, to cut emissions, cycling and walking need to be greatly increased.

The Plan should provide for a programme of modifying roads to provide safe walking and cycling and a programme to open all publicly owned reserves for walking and, where possible, cycling.

The hapu’s objection to a Manu Bay walkway originally related to a proposed coastal route. WDC should clarify with them whether they object to a route in the road corridor. That would appear to be inconsistent with acceptance of a road and sewer line in that space and therefore unlikely. The road to Manu Bay has poor visibility, yet is often used by walkers and cyclists. In the July 2009 Issues and Options report on page 7 a scenario was described as, “The road beyond Wainui Reserve has become a multi-modal path. Vehicles, pedestrians and cyclist ‘share with care’. Locals are happy with the quieter, less dangerous road and have the confidence to allow their children to walk to the beach or catch a shuttle (free for locals) to town.” I support that scenario and submit that the Plan should provide for its implementation.

no spray zones

A new charge is planned for ‘no spray zone’ applications of $192. If WDC has to charge, why shouldn’t we opt in for spraying? After all, not spraying is saving WDC time and money each time the spraying isn’t done.

parking

Just after Raglan Community Board conducted their survey of community priorities, an extra 57 parking spaces were provided in James St. At present most of those spaces are empty most of the day. Private parking is available off Wi Neera St for $10 a week, but most of that is also unused. The use of these parking spaces should be monitored before further CBD parking is considered.

population

5.1A, page 8 says the Long Term Plan includes an estimate of capital works to be paid for by Raglan Land Co for the 500 house Rangitahi subdivision. However, the population estimates for Raglan show very little growth.

YEAR–POPULATION

2011 – 2800

2012 – 2800

2015 – 2700

2025 – 2700

2035 – 2800

2045 – 3000

Despite this virtually static population forecast, several projects are justified as allowing for growth. If no growth is expected to occur, the money could be reallocated to Raglan’s top 5 priorities.

rate increases

The Plan says, “In 2007 the Government carried out extensive research on rates affordability. That report states that rates are affordable up to 5% of household income. The 2013 census results show a median household income for the Waikato district is $69,400 per annum. For 2014, a rates bill of up to $3,470 would therefore have been deemed affordable for households with an income of $69,400.”

However, in 2013 Raglan’s median income was $25,000. The average household size was 2.3 people, so the median household income was $57,500. QV puts the median house price for Raglan at $413,600, quite a bit higher than the $385,000 shown on page 25. Even that lower valuation equates to a rates bill of $2,902.31, or 5%; ie for half of Raglan’s population rates are unaffordable even before the projected above CPI increases. Raglan’s unaffordable burden could be eased by reducing targeted rates, or by making them fairer by charging a targeted rate for roading in proportion to the cost of providing each road to a property.

recycling

I support Xtreme Zero Waste’s model submission at http://xtremezerowaste.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/XZW_WDCLongTermPlan2015.pdf.

sewage

The Plan says, “It is anticipated that when the Raglan wastewater discharge consent is renewed that there may be a requirement to install an alternative treated effluent disposal option” and gives the date 2021/2 and an estimate of $12.2m cost. It also says, “Upgrade the wastewater treatment plant to meet levels of service and comply with resource consent conditions.” The date for that is 2016/7 at a cost of $3.7m.

At a meeting with Raglan residents, Council manager, Tim Harty, explained that the 2016/7 spending is needed to consistently reach compliance levels and that the 2021/2 estimate is an arbitrary figure based on a plan to extend the sewage outfall away from the edge of Wainamu Beach. However, he wasn’t aware that the previous extension was washed away in a storm. To avoid the same fate befalling a replacement extension it may therefore be necessary to spend more than is planned if that is the chosen solution.

I therefore wish to draw attention to the Raglan Naturally plan (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kbQyEEQ606X01KNVJaMzVrWFE/view?usp=sharing), which was the result of a more comprehensive consultation with the Raglan community than any other plan (see https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-kbQyEEQ606WWpMR1VBU205OW8/view?usp=sharing). It said, “Disposal to harbour to be avoided. Investigate use of compost toilets in the urban area”. Neither has ever been done.

The need to do these is at least as urgent as it was in 1999. Raglan’s economy is highly vulnerable to any evidence substantiating the widespread allegations of illnesses linked to sewage. A link has so far not been proven, but neither has it been disproved. All sewage disposal options should be evaluated. In addition to compost toilets, consideration should be given to cleaning the outfall sufficiently to re-use as part of the water supply. To encourage adoption of composting toilets, consideration should be given to abolishing the requirement that all properties close to the reticulated sewer system should pay sewage rates, even if not connected.

swimming pool

In September 2014 Raglan Community Board asked for a report on a Heated Swimming Pool. They’ve not had one, though in 2012 they had been told “work on feasibility study begun”. An estimate then said that the school pool could be solar heated and enclosed for $38,000. Earlier in that year WDC had agreed to $15,000 for a feasibility study. The first fundraising for a ‘Coronation Pool’ seems to have been in 1911. This has long been a priority for Raglan. The school pool is not the ideal solution, but this was the second highest priority for Raglan, the cost appears to be modest and an improvement is preferable to taking no action.

traction seal

The proposal to spend $300,000 on sealing about 4 x 100m sections of road each year seems very poor value. The unsealed roads have very few vehicles (see traffic counts at https://www.waikatodistrict.govt.nz/Documents-Library/Files/Services/Roading/Traffic-counts-May2013.aspx). If $300,000 pa can be afforded for transport, it’s likely it would benefit many more if spent on buses (in 2011, the last year bus patronage figures were published, Raglan buses carried 39,906 and Huntly 131,877).

Trans Pacific partnership agreement (TPPA)

Ask WDC and WRC to adopt resolutions similar to this passed by Auckland (and many other councils) – http://www.itsourfuture.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Auckland-City-resolution.pdf

village green

Raglan Naturally aspired to these concepts –

• A ‘village square’ concept – a central place for time-out and relaxation, music, and art and craft events.

• Keeping the Main Street Development programme consistent with evolving concepts such as

the ‘village square’

• A relaxed and pedestrian-friendly CBD.

• A central business district mall – in whole or part.

The Plan should make provision for a structure plan to implement these aspirations and for minor works to put them in place. The cost of this could be negligible if the ‘get out of jail free card’ promises originally made to the PlaceMaking group are fulfilled.

Wainui Rd bridge

At Page 44 in the Infrastructure Strategy, it is proposed to spend $6m on this bridge in 2023/24, with a decision being made in 2021. This bridge was rebuilt in 1955 and is therefore far from the oldest bridge on the WDC roading system. No report has suggested that it is unsafe. None of the 378 responses to the Community Board survey suggested it needed anything other than a higher handrail. If the Rangitahi subdivision is approved, attempts should be made to reduce traffic by improved public transport and cycle routes before spending so much on a bridge.

water meters

On page 13 is an explanation that water metering allows rates to be reduced in favour of “a more proactive approach towards user pays through consumption charging”. As noted above, Raglan’s rates are already unaffordable for half the population. Raglan’s water consumption rarely exceeds two thirds of the consented maximum. Therefore there is no need for metering to conserve water. In Raglan metering will be particularly harsh on large families living in Raglan throughout the year. Metering and flat-rate per litre charges will save money for bach owners, who only use water for a short period during the summer. However, it is that additional demand which requires a more expensive water reticulation system, with additional storage and pumping capacity. There is no need for metering in Raglan, but if it is introduced, it should be accompanied by a seasonal charging rate, which targets the extra costs imposed by the summer peak.

$2.3m is budgeted for a water trunk main upgrade for Raglan, as it is said that without this expenditure, “Trunkmain system will continue to work at capacity, restricting growth”. This spending appears to be unnecessary, in view of the static population noted above.