/ ' &DYHUV &KLHI ([HFXWLYH 0HPEHUV

Transcription

1 A G E N D A

2 Members are reminded of their obligation to declare any conflicts of interest they might have in respect of the items on this agenda).

3

4

5 (As shown in the track change version of Section 5.17 attached at Appendix A).

6

7 The hearing of submissions will commence at 1.00pm.

8 [individual resolutions be passed for each submission including any comments the Council wishes to be included in the response to submitters (which might be the staff comments)]

9

10 Council Agenda Page 12 APOLOGIES

11 Council Agenda Page 13

12 Council Agenda Page 14

13 Council Agenda Page 15

14 Council Agenda Page 16

15 Council Agenda Page 17

16 Council Agenda Page 19

17 Council Agenda Page 20

18 Council Agenda Page 21

19 Council Agenda Page 22

20 Council Agenda Page 23

21 Council Agenda Page 24

22 Council Agenda Page 25

23 Council Agenda Page 26

24 Council Agenda Page 27

25 Council Agenda Page 28

26 Council Agenda Page 29

27 Council Agenda Page 30

28 Council Agenda Page 31

29 Council Agenda Page 32

30 Council Agenda Page 33 APOLOGIES

31 Council Agenda Page 34

32 Council Agenda Page 35

33 Council Agenda Page 37

34 Council Agenda Page 38

35 Council Agenda Page 39

36 Council Agenda Page 40

37 Council Agenda Page 41

38 Council Agenda Page 42

39 Council Agenda Page 43

40 Council Agenda Page 44

41 Council Agenda Page 46

42 Council Agenda Page 47

43 Council Agenda Page 48

44 Council Agenda Page 49

45 Council Agenda Page 50 local infrastructure

46 Council Agenda Page 51

47 Council Agenda Page 52

48 Council Agenda Page 53

49 Council Agenda Page 54

50 Council Agenda Page 55 Leases and licences 1. To approve the renewal of any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy (other than pensioner housing tenancy) or to vary the terms and conditions of any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy, in respect of: All properties, where a prospective tenant fits the criteria determined by Council. 2. To terminate any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy in respect of all property excluding pensioner housing where non-compliance with the terms of the licence or lease exist. 3. Authority to act under an Order of the Tenancy Tribunal. 4. To approve the allocation of tenancies for pensioner flats with any issues outside policy being referred to the Pensioner Flats Allocation Sub-committee. Sub-Delegation Community Services Manager

51 Council Agenda Page 56

52 Council Agenda Page 57

53 Council Agenda Page 58

54 Council Agenda Page 59

55 Council Agenda Page 60

56 Council Agenda Page 61

57 Council Agenda Page 62 9 th February 2016 Steve Fabish Community Services Manager Hauraki District Council P O Box 17 Paeroa 3640 Dear Steve, Re: Patetonga-Kaihere Play Centre building/patetonga-kaihere Community Centre Society Incorporated As discussed late 2015 and more recently the Patetonga and Kaihere community have registered the Patetonga-Kaihere Community Centre Society Incorporated ( NZ Companies Office Registration number ) for the purposes of taking ownership of the building (the Play Centre building) on the Patetonga Domain currently owned by the Waikato Playcentre Association. There are five Objects for which the Society was established for with the two major being, (a) To take ownership as licensee of the building on the Patetonga Domain currently owned by the Waikato Play Centre Association and to deal with it as licensee thereafter. (b) To otherwise manage the use, maintenance and preservation of the building and its associated amenities for the benefit of the Patetonga-Kaihere community and all members of the society. The community, having had huge input to the fund raising and completion of the building some 35 years ago are comforted by the Waikato Play Centre Association s decision to return the ownership of the same to the community which will now ensure that its usage is extended to the wider community. Currently the building is been used on a weekly basis by two groups, the Top Road Play Group and Art Friends, a group of ladies from within the community and its further surrounds. (I am aware that there has been two occasions recently whereby the building has been rented for family gathering purposes). I along with the committee are well aware that we have somewhat beaten the gun by utilising the building prior to final transfer of ownership and the granting of a lease but are of the opinion the building is a community asset and should be used as such. Whilst the committee appointed, as required under the rules, have yet to meet formally we have in informal discussions concluded that there could and will be huge opportunity for community usage. Hireage to community groups as a meeting place would be relatively high on any agenda given the state of the Patetonga Hall which from what I understand has only been used once in the past three years and is possibly reaching the end of its suitability as a public facility.

58 Council Agenda Page 63 Maintenance of the building and its surrounds will be somewhat simplified given community ownership rather than the limited Play Centre families resources of the past. I personally have been involved with a small number of Play Centre families attempting day to day maintenance and found the task somewhat taxing given the small pool of families on which to call for assistance. We have already had the offer of a weekly cutting of the lawn from a local retiree and we are confident that ongoing maintenance will not be neglected. In fact it will be the committee s responsibility to ensure the facility is maintained for the benefit of the community. Given the Waikato Play Centre s stated intention of gifting back the building to the community the necessity for the Hauraki District Council to grant a lease of the land the building is on to the Patetonga-Kaihere Community Centre Society Incorporated is necessary. A process which I and the committee would assume as a somewhat simple process given that ownership of the building will now be with the community. If you are requiring any further information please do not hesitate in contacting myself or in my absence Chris Harris ( or , info@revolutionproducts.co.nz) Regards Ross Harris 37 Mangawhero Road R D 3 Morrinsville CC. Jeremy Brooklaw

59 Council Agenda Page 64

60 Council Agenda Page 65

61 Council Agenda Page 66

62 Council Agenda Page 67 Leases and licences 1. To approve the renewal of any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy (other than pensioner housing tenancy) or to vary the terms and conditions of any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy, in respect of: All properties, where a prospective tenant fits the criteria determined by Council. 2. To terminate any lease, licence to occupy or tenancy in respect of all property excluding pensioner housing where non-compliance with the terms of the licence or lease exist. 3. Authority to act under an Order of the Tenancy Tribunal. 4. To approve the allocation of tenancies for pensioner flats with any issues outside policy being referred to the Pensioner Flats Allocation Sub-committee. Sub-Delegation Community Services Manager

63 Council Agenda Page 68 Option One: Option Two:

64 Council Agenda Page 69

65 Council Agenda Page 70

66 Council Agenda Page 71

67 Council Agenda Page 72

68 Council Agenda Page 73

69 Council Agenda Page 74

70 Council Agenda Page 75

71 Council Agenda Page 76

72 Council Agenda Page 77

73 Council Agenda Page 78

74 Council Agenda Page 79

75 Council Agenda Page 80

76 Council Agenda Page 81

77 Council Agenda Page 82

78 Council Agenda Page 83

79 Council Agenda Page 84

80 Council Agenda Page 85

81 Council Agenda Page 86

82 Council Agenda Page 87

83 Council Agenda Page 88

84 Council Agenda Page 89

85 Council Agenda Page 90

86 Council Agenda Page 91

87 Council Agenda Page 92

88 Council Agenda Page 93

89 Council Agenda Page 94

90 Council Agenda Page 95

91 Council Agenda Page 96

92 Council Agenda Page 97

93 Council Agenda Page 98

94 Council Agenda Page 99 THAT the report be received. THAT the proposed changes to year two of the Hauraki Long Term Plan (as presented in the proposed annual plan content and proposed financial impact information) be approved for inclusion in the 2016/17 annual plan document, and THAT the Council determines that the 2016/17 annual plan proposals as drafted to date do not constitute a significant or material change from the Long Term Plan, and on this basis it does not intend to invite public consultation on the annual plan, but rather will inform the public of the adoption of the 2016/17 annual plan and its contents, and

95 Council Agenda Page 100 THAT pursuant to section 12 of the Local Government Act 2002, the proposed increase of $6.00 per week to the Council s pensioner housing rental fees be approved for inclusion in the draft 2016/17 Schedule of Fees and Charges. THAT the report be received. THAT the Council approves Option one and that the new fees schedule becomes effective from 1 March 2016, and THAT the fees presented in Table 1 and Table 2 of the report be included in the 2016/17 fees and charges schedule, and THAT the new fees be communicated to food premises owners by letter, and the general public via the Hauraki Herald, the Council s Facebook page, and the Council s website

96 Council Agenda Page 101 THAT the report be received. THAT pursuant to Section 37 and Section 68 of the Dog Control Act 1996 the Fees and Charges is adopted as the scale of fees for Dog Registration and Impounding Fees for the 2016/17 dog registration year.

97 Council Agenda Page 102

98 Council Agenda Page 103

99 Council Agenda Page 104 Draft Hauraki District Council Fees and Charges for 2016/17 Effective 1 July 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS WASTE WATER SERVICES... 2 WATER SUPPLY SERVICES... 2 SOLID WASTE SERVICES... 3 Refuse Bag Collection... 3 Recycling Collection... 3 Refuse Transfer Stations... 4 COMMUNITY SERVICES... 5 Cemeteries... 5 Memorial Halls for Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi... 7 Waihi Event Centre... 9 Libraries Pensioner Housing Parks and Reserves Freedom Camping... Error! Bookmark not defined. Swimming Pools REGULATORY SERVICES Building services Building consent application lodgement Fees paid after building consent Charges for major amendments to building consents Charges for other building related sundry Development Contributions Dog Control Environmental Health Liquor Licensing Noise Control RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Stock Impounding CORPORATE SERVICES Document Management and Control... 27

100 Council Agenda Page WASTE WATER SERVICES Paeroa Septage Facilities The following fees are set for the septage facility. Service item Charge (including GST) Application for use of Facility: (Includes issue of keys, security card, and training in use of facility) $ Replacement Card (Lost or Stolen) $26.00 Charge per m³ deposited: $15.50 Landfill leachate is prohibited from the Council s facilities except by separate agreement. WATER SUPPLY SERVICES Extraordinary Water Use The Extraordinary Water Rate is set at 2 times the current urban treated water rate for purposes other than permanent metered connections such as tankered water for commercial users (sometimes outside of the District).

101 Council Agenda Page 106 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 3 SOLID WASTE SERVICES Refuse Bag Collection The cost of a refuse bag is $2.20. The cost of purchasing a rubbish bag represents the actual costs for the kerbside collection and disposal of the refuse. Recycling Collection Wheelie Bin and Glass Crate Replacement The cost of purchasing a replacement wheelie bin should the bin be stolen or damaged Small Wheelie bin (80 litre) delivered to property Large Wheelie bin (240 litre) delivered to property Glass crate (60 litre) collected from Council offices Charge (including GST) $ each $ each $15.00 each Wheelie Bin Component Replacement The cost of purchasing wheelie bin components should they become damaged Axle Wheels Hinge Pins Charge (including GST) $6.00 each $5.00 each $0.20 each

102 Council Agenda Page Refuse Transfer Stations * Please note that for ease of operational use these fees have been rounded to the nearest 10 cent value. Disposal of Refuse Vehicle/ User Type Maximum quantity of refuse requiring disposal Charge (including GST) Single Bag Kleensac size $3.20* Car Boot 0.2m 3 loose $9.60* Station Wagon 0.4m 3 loose $19.10* Small Ute / Trailer 1m 3 loose $47.80* Large Ute / Trailer 2m 3 loose $95.50* Truck or Bulk Load (weighed on certified weighbridge ) Paeroa only Per tonne $159.20* High volume/ low weight (i.e. non-recyclable packaging such as polystyrene) Per m 3 $9.60* Disposal of Green Waste Vehicle/ User Type Maximum quantity of refuse requiring disposal Charge (including GST) Single Bag Kleensac size $2.20* Car Boot 0.2m 3 loose $6.70* Station Wagon 0.4m 3 loose $13.40* Small Ute / Trailer 1m 3 loose $33.40* Large Ute / Trailer 2m 3 loose $66.90* Truck or Bulk Load (weighed on certified weighbridge) Paeroa only Per tonne $111.50* Disposal of Other Waste Other Type Charge (including GST) Car tyres $3.20 each* Tyres 4WD tyres $4.20 each* Truck tyres $8.50 each* Tractor tyres $22.30 each* LPG bottles A fee is charged for recycling $5.40 each* Clean condition with seat and tyres removed, petrol tank pierced and Car Bodies all other fluids removed. Free Other than described as above $27.60* Recycling Glass, oil, paper, cardboard, aluminium, plastic soft drink and milk bottles, scrap metal and car batteries. Free

103 Council Agenda Page 108 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 5 COMMUNITY SERVICES Cemeteries District-Wide Cemetery Charges Service Item Plot Purchase Charge (including GST) Casket - District Resident $ Casket - Non District Resident** (i.e. resident charge+60%) $ Ashes Plaque Lawn District Resident $ Ashes Plaque Lawn - Non District Resident $ Upright Memorial District Resident $ Upright Memorial Non District Resident $ Burial Fees Ashes $ Burial for stillborn and under 1 year of age on a Weekday (excluding Public Holiday) $ First burial (standard and extra depth) for 1 year of age and older on a Weekday (excluding Public Holiday) $ Second burial (in same plot as first burial) for 1 year of age and older on a Weekday (excluding Public Holiday) $ Burial on Public Holiday (additional charge to First burial fee) $ Burial on Weekends (additional charge to First burial fee) $ Ashes burial on Weekends (additional charge) $ Paeroa Old Section (includes extra burial costs in confined inaccessible space) $ Waihi Memorial Wall Purchase Memorial Wall plaque and inscription (up to 100 letters) $ Inscription cost - Per extra letter $0.65 Cost of attaching plaque $45.00 Ngatea Ashes Wall Purchase of Vault and placement of two ashes (including plaque inscription) $ Vault reservation only (not including placement of ashes or plaque inscription) $ Placement one set of ashes only in Vault (including plaque inscription) $ Purchase of Vault and placement of one set of ashes (including plaque inscription) $ Placement of two ashes in a vault (including plaque inscription) $ Purchase of Vault and placement of first (of two) ashes (including plaque inscription) $ Placement of second ashes into pre-purchased vault (including plaque inscription) $ Ngatea Memorial Wall Memorial Wall inscription placed on wall $55.00 General Permit fee to erect monument $50.00 Breaking concrete (to reinstate is family s responsibility) At full cost

104 Council Agenda Page Service Item Charge (including GST) Disinterment - Casket At cost * Re-interment - Casket At cost * Disinterment - Ashes At cost * Re-interment Ashes At cost * Request to change reserved plot $55.00 Request to change Warrant $ Request to sell reserved plot back to Council $55.00 Administration fee for unpaid reserved plot $55.00 * At cost but no less than respective interment charge above. ** Where a person who has not been a resident or a ratepayer purchases a plot an out of district fee is charged. A local resident is defined as a person who has lived within the district for a period of twelve months or more. Returned service personnel and spouses plots Under the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 the Council is required to allocate part of its cemeteries to Returned Servicemen as defined by the Ministry of Defence. This means that the cost of a plot in this part of the cemetery is not passed onto the deceased person s estate. However we do still charge the burial fee as outlined above. The Office of Veterans' Affairs, (as part of the Ministry of Defence) is responsible for maintaining and ensuring the proper administration of the Returned Services part of the cemetery. Only the Paeroa and Waihi Cemeteries have an RSA section. The Miranda cemetery does not contain an RSA section.

105 Council Agenda Page 110 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 7 Memorial Halls for Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi The fees are based on a minimum booking period of two hours and then by the hour thereafter. The value of the fees set for the Not for Profit category are retained at a level to encourage use of the hall by that category, which have to date been the main group hiring the hall facilities. Users of the District halls may request assistance from the respective Ward chair for the paying of fee. Category of User COM SOC NFP CIV Commercial: Primarily business entities i.e. individuals or organisations whose prime goal is to derive an income for personal or shareholders gain. Social: Individuals: clubs or organisations that are using the facilities for a social function such as weddings, birthdays, fund raising, funerals and celebrations etc. Not for Profit: These are individuals or organisations that may be an informal club or are registered as incorporated societies established as not for profit. Civic: An activity that is "sponsored" by the Mayor or the Chairman of the Ward Committee for a community associated purpose. Hall Hire Commercial User Commercial User charge All Halls (including GST) Minimum Hire Per additional hour Small Hall - Min. booking of 2 hours $32.00 $16.00 Main Hall - Min. booking of 2 hours $40.00 $20.00 Whole Complex - Min. booking of 2 hours $64.00 $32.00 Hall Hire Social User Commercial User charge All Halls (including GST) Minimum Hire Per additional hour Small Hall - Min. booking of 2 hours $16.00 $8.00 Main Hall - Min. booking of 2 hours $22.00 $11.00 Whole Complex - Min. booking of 2 hours $34.00 $17.00

106 Council Agenda Page Hall Hire Not For Profit User All Halls Not for Profit User charge (including GST) Small Hall Main Hall Whole Complex Hours Minimum charge of $ Every hour after 2 hours charged at $2.50 Minimum charge of $ Every hour after 2 hours charged at $3.00 Minimum charge of $ Every hour after 2 hours charged at $ hrs $12.00 $16.00 $ $14.50 $19.00 $ $17.00 $22.00 $ $19.50 $25.00 $ $22.00 $28.00 $ $24.50 $31.00 $ $27.00 $34.00 $ $29.50 $37.00 $ $32.00 $40.00 $ $34.50 $43.00 $ $37.00 $46.00 $ $39.50 $49.00 $ $42.00 $52.00 $ $44.50 $55.00 $ (All Day rate) $47.00 $58.00 $ Hall Hire Kitchen Use Item Use of kitchen Use of crockery Charge (including GST) $5.00 per booking $10.00 per booking Damage Guarantee Bond Memorial Halls NFP Users must sign damage/cleaning guarantee form to meet all damage and after function cleaning costs associated with a respective hire (not required to pay a bond). Social and commercial users must pay a refundable cash bond of $500 prior to the use of the hall and are required to sign a guarantee form to meet all such damage/cleaning costs that exceed the value of the bond.

107 Council Agenda Page 112 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 9 Waihi Event Centre Fees are based on a 2 hour minimum rate and there after charged at an hourly rate. WAIHI EVENT CENTRE HIRE Not For Profit Users 2 Hour minimum rate (including GST) Additional base hourly rate (including GST) Category 1 (regular Sports users) $25.00 $12.50 Category 2 (casual Sports users) $30.00 $15.00 Category 3 (where admission charge applies) $34.00 $17.00 Commercial Users Category 4 (Events Activity) $ $60.00 Category 5 (where admission charge applies $ $70.00

108 Council Agenda Page Libraries Rental Items Item Rental charge (including GST) Rental period (including GST) Renewals permitted Overdue charge (including GST) Maximum overdue charge is the cost of the item. New fiction books $ weeks $2.00 for further two weeks $0.50 per day Older fiction and adult non-fiction Free 3 weeks Free for further three weeks $0.30 per day Large print books Free 3 weeks Free for further three weeks $0.30 per day Magazines $ week $1.00 for further one week $0.50 per day Audio books* $ weeks $1.00 for further three weeks $1.00 per day DVD's $ week $3.00 for further one week $1.00 per day Children s fiction and non-fiction Free 3 weeks Free for further three weeks $0.10 per day Reserve Items Item Reserve fee (including GST) Charged for all holds/reserves/transits on items $0.50 Other Service Charges (Including GST) Service Charge (including GST) Public Internet access Public Word processing Photocopying Free Free Single-sided A4 B&W $0.20 A3 B&W $0.30 A4 Colour $1.00 A3 Colour $1.50 Double-sided A4 B&W $0.30 A3 B&W $0.50 A4 Colour $1.50 A3 Colour $2.50 Scanning $1.00 first page, then $0.50 per page Inter-library loans Replacement library card $3.00 APNK printing Lost/damaged administration charge Refunds for lost items returned Debt collection charges Discarded items for sale $8.00 per items, plus the costs from the supplying library Printing on A4 paper from APNK printer is $0.30 per page $12.00 charge to cover staff time additional to the costs involved with lost/damaged items. Refunds are permitted if in accordance with the District Collection plan criteria. Length of time overdue, condition and currency of the item may reduce the amount refunded. Amount will vary depending on criteria in the Collection Plan. If debt collection action is required an additional charge to cover debt collection may be added. Amount will vary depending on cost of the service. Sales charges to vary between $ $5.00 with special deals at the Library manager s discretion * National Library and Hauraki Audio books are free to borrow for users with approved print disabilities. Free membership is offered to residents of neighbouring districts. Council has reciprocal membership with Matamata-Piako, Western Bay of Plenty, Thames-Coromandel and Waikato District Councils. Discarded items may be given free of charge to Hauraki volunteer libraries or other approved institutions. The cost to replace items, criteria for refunds, standard prices for items are reviewed annually in the Libraries Collection Plan.

109 Council Agenda Page 114 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 11 Pensioner Housing No GST is charged on pensioner housing rental Pensioner Flats/ Units Charge cost per week (no GST) Ngatea 20 Pauls Drive Single bedroom (4 Units) Kaihere Road Single bedroom (4 Units) 18 Paul Drive Single bedroom (4 Units) Paeroa Junction Road Single bedroom (18 Units) King Street Single bedroom (6 Units) Waihi Seddon Street Single bedroom (4 Units) Seddon Street Bedsit (2 Units) Moresby Ave Single bedsit (4 Units) Moresby Ave /Elliott Street Single bedroom (7 Units) Kenny Street Single bedroom (2 Units) Kenny Street Single bedsit (2 Units) $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $110.00

110 Council Agenda Page Parks and Reserves Facility Hire Activity Field marking by Council Additional notes Charge (including GST) Touch Rugby 2 Fields per Rugby Field $ Rugby Per field $ Athletics 100m and 400m Track $1, Soccer Per field $ No charge if club or organisation marks field under agreement with Parks and Reserves Manager Sporting Event Reserve Use Park hireage to an out-of-district organisation Bond/deposit applies* $65.00 per day Grandstand use By local non-youth club per season $ per annum Grandstand hireage to out-of-district organisation Bond/deposit applies* $ per day Rubbish Bin fee Council to supply bins and dispose of refuse Special Events e.g. circuses and other commercially based events Per bin 44Gal/ 200Litre Bond/deposit applies* $35.00 per bin $ per day Paeroa Domain Lighting for regular users Per Hour $12.50 per hour Paeroa Domain Lighting for non-regular user Additional set fee to hourly rate for regular users of Domain $35.00 Notes: Rubbish Bins - event organisers can provide their own bins and dispose of their refuse in an appropriate manner. Line marking - can be conducted by organisers but subject to agreement and conditions set by the Parks and Reserves Manager. Youth - means Youth Rugby and Schools Bond or Deposit Where noted by an * above, a bond/deposit is payable as part of the hireage arrangements. Bond or Deposit Hireage of Parks and Reserves only Hireage of Parks and Reserves and Grandstand for any one occasion Note This bond/deposit is refundable provided the park is left tidy and undamaged to the Parks and Reserves Manager s satisfaction. The deposit will be used to meet some or all of any costs incurred by the Council cleaning and repairing following an event. Any costs incurred greater than the value of the deposit will be sought from the organiser by the Council. Charge (including GST) $ $ A bond or deposit is refundable provided the park is left tidy and undamaged to the Parks and Reserves Manager s satisfaction. The deposit will be used to meet some or all of any costs incurred by the Council cleaning and repairing following an event. Any costs incurred greater than the value of the deposit will be sought from the organiser by the Council.

111 Council Agenda Page 116 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 13 Overnight Parking Item Railway Reserve overnight parking (A maximum stay of two consecutive nights in any one calendar month applies) Overnight fee (including GST) $5.00 per night Swimming Pools Admission Charges Admission Charge (including GST) Entry charge per swimmer $ Swim Concession per swimmer $18.00 Notes: During the month of January there is a daily special admission charge of $1.00 per swimmer (aged 5 years and over). FREE admission for Children under 5 years of age, when actively supervised by a responsible person over the age of 16 years. Supervising person (non swimming) may enter the grounds free of charge. No child under the age of 8 years shall enter the pool unless in the charge of a person over the age of 16 years. Concession Ticket Charges Season Pass Number of swimmers Charge (including GST) 1 person $ persons $ persons $ persons $ Per Swim Pass - 10 Swim Concession Number of swimmers Charge (including GST) 1 person $ persons $ persons $ persons $60.00 Schools using Council Pools Charges School Paeroa Primary and College Consortium Ngatea Primary Hauraki Plains College Charge (including GST) $2,000 per annum $3.00 per enrolled pupil per season $2.00 per pupil per entry

112 Council Agenda Page REGULATORY SERVICES All regulatory fees and charges are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated. Building services District-Wide Building Consent Fees Effective for all Building Consents lodged on or after 1 July 2015 Project Description PIM Admin Processing Temporary, Short Stay Structures requiring an inspection and Code Compliance Certificate under the Building Act. (e.g. Marquees, Circus Tents) Inspection fees Code Compliance Lodgement Total $ Solid Fuel Heaters $70.00 $50.00 $ $60.00 $ Minor Works requiring only one inspection (e.g. plumbing & $70.00 $70.00 $60.00 $ $60.00 $ drainage, demolition) Pre-approved proprietary brand domestic garages and outbuildings up to the value of $85.00 $70.00 $ $ $95.00 $ $20,000 Wet floor up to a value of $20,000 $70.00 $70.00 $60.00 $ $80.00 $ Solar Hot Water Conversions $ $160.00

113 Council Agenda Page 118 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 15 Building consent application lodgement District-Wide Lodgement Fees Required For Building Consent Application Project Value *PIM/TAI Admin Processing Inspection fees Code Compliance Lodgement Total Up to $4,999 $90.00 $90.00 $ $160 per inspection $ $ $5,000 to $9,999 $90.00 $90.00 $ $160 per inspection $ $ $10,000 to $19,999 $90.00 $90.00 $ $160 per inspection $ $ $20,000 to $49,999 $ $90.00 $ $160 per inspection $ $ $50,000 to $99,999 $ $90.00 $ $160 per inspection $ $ $100,000 to $249,999 $ $90.00 $1, $160 per inspection $ $1, $250,000 to $499,999 $ $90.00 $1, $160 per inspection $ $1, $500,000 + $ $90.00 $1, $160 per inspection $ $2, *Note: Where applicants do not request a PIM, the Council must still provide information such as hazard information relevant to the project and this is in the form of Territorial Authority Information (TAI) provided with their building consent application. Fees paid after building consent District-wide fees to be paid after consent approval Type Fee Notes Inspection fees number of inspections required will depend upon the Building Consent requirements. Specialist services, peer review structural checking $ per visit Cost plus 10% Assessment of the number of building inspections will be made as part of the building consent process. The assessed inspections and Government Levies (if required) will be invoiced with the building consent fees and must be paid prior to the building consent being issued. Accreditation Levy $0.85 Per $1,000 of project value Projects $20,000 and over are subject to Government Levies BDH $2.01 BRANZ $1.00 Per $1,000 of project value Charges for major amendments to building consents District-wide charges for major amendments to consents Project Description PIM Admin Processing Inspection fee Code Compliance Lodgement Total Deposit $ Suspensions (for each separate suspension after 1 July 2008) - $40.00 $ $100.00

114 Council Agenda Page Charges for other building related sundry District-wide charges for other building related sundry Type Charge Notes Certificate of Acceptance Additional fees will be charged for: Value of original consent $ Work over value of $85.00 per hour Provision of certificates, execution of documents, production of schedule. Payable $ prior to release. Inspection of buildings to be transported into District (within a 120km radius): Deposit $ Final cost actual cost based as follows: Hourly rate Mileage/km Administration Other costs not scheduled $ $0.85 $ At cost Certificate of Title per title $35.00 Certificate of Public Use (includes inspection) $ Separate PIM $ Reactivation of Refused Code Compliance Certificate $ Compliance Schedule $ Amendment of Compliance Schedule $60.00 Building Code Certification under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 $ An inspection audit is undertaken at the completion of each project. Any extra inspections required in addition to those paid with the Building Consent fees will be invoiced. These extra fees must be paid before a Code Compliance Certificate will be issued. Prepaid inspections that have not been required will be refunded when the Code Compliance Certificate is issued. Inspections over 120km will only be accepted from other BCA or Accredited Certifiers. If the cost of processing significantly exceeds the unit price then the actual time taken shall be payable at the hourly rate. Development Contributions Development contributions are required where the effect of that development is to require new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity which requires Council to incur capital expenditure. You will be invoiced separately for this if required.

115 Council Agenda Page 120 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 17 Dog Control District-Wide Dog Control Fees Dog Owner Classification Fees De-Sex Rebate (certificate required) Minimum fee General Dogs $82.00 $15.00 $67.00 Dogs in excess of three (3) Responsible Owner Licensing (ROL) Dog Penalty fee if paid after 31 July De-sexed $33.50 Entire $41.00 Maximum fee Neutered Maximum fee Entire $ $ $ $27.00 $13.50 $40.50 $40.50 $52.00 $15.00 $37.00 Loss of licence - - Dangerous Dog $ $22.50 $ Replacement Tag $5.00 De-sexed $50.25 Entire $61.50 $ $ Miscellaneous Fee Impounding fees First Impounding $50.00 Second Offence $80.00 Third Offence $ Plus sustenance fee per day $12.00 Microchipping fee $47.00 Consent to keep more than two dogs in Urban area $52.00 ROL application fee $32.00 Transferred ROL Property Inspection Fee $25.00 Note: Failure to register ROL dogs by 31 July of each registration year disqualifies Responsible Owner status.

116 Council Agenda Page Environmental Health Food Premises - Food Act 2014 The Food Act 2014 is coming into force over a three-year transitional period with the final day being 28 February Most of the sections of the Act came into effect on 1 March 2016 which requires food premises to operate under a Food Control Plan. Existing food premises operating under the now replaced Food Hygiene Regulations 1974 will have a three year transitional period (March 2016 until March 2019) in which to move to Food Control Plans, but new operations must operate under a Food Control Plan from 1 March Existing food premises (applicable during three-year transitional period) Existing food premises registration fees are based on annual assessment and the assessed number of inspections. Each additional inspection may incur an additional charge equivalent to the base fee. Regulation Fees Food Premises Non Graded Premises Registration Fee (Fruit Shops) $ Food Premises Registration/Grading Fee for A graded premises $ Food Premises Registration/Grading Fee for B graded premises $ Food Premises Registration/Grading Fee for D graded premises $ Food Premises Registration/Grading Fee for E graded premises $ Food Premises Re-grading Fee $ Food premises operating a Food Control Plan or National Programme under Food Act 2014 Food premises operating under a food control plan and new premises operating a food control plan or National Programme under the Food Act 2014 will not be required to renew their registration during the transition period but will be required to have an annual verification, inspection and audit, and pay the applicable fees set out in the table below. The fees for Food premises operating a Food Control Plan or National Programme under Food Act 2014 are based on actual and reasonable costs associated with the activity which includes registration, verification, compliance and monitoring functions for food premises. Regulation Fees Application for registration of food control plan $ Application for renewal of a registered food control plan $ Application for registration of an amended food control plan $ Non significant amendment of food control plan $ Change in circumstances for a food control plan. $ Voluntary suspension of a registered food control plan $ Verification, inspection and audit. $ per hour Revisit following an audit. $ per hour Issue of an improvement notice by a food safety officer. No charge Application and assessment of a National programme $ Application for renewal of a national programme $ Amendment of a registered national programme. $ Voluntary suspension of a National programme. $100.00

117 Council Agenda Page 122 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 19 Other Environmental Health Fees Regulation 7 of the Health (Registration of Premises) Regulations 1966, requires that the fees payable on application for Certificate of Registration and upon the issue, renewal, and noting of such Certificates shall be such as the local authority by resolution decides. Other premises licences requiring a registration certificate Regulation Fee Offensive Trade Licence $ Hairdressers Premises Licence $ Dual Registration Fee (Camping Grounds and Basic Food Stalls) Food Registration Fee (as risk assessed) +$ Transfer of Registration - inspection of premises for change of operation or ownership $ Fee for Food Stalls and Hawkers for one off events: 1 to 9 stalls 10 or more stalls $ $ Other premises subject to inspection (not required to hold a registration certificate) Pursuant to Regulation 83(3) of the Food Hygiene Regulations 1974, with respect to premises listed in Regulation 4(4) of the Food Hygiene Regulation 1974 being premises not required to hold a registration certificate but subject to inspections. Regulation Fees An annual inspection fee as applicable to premises as listed in Food Hygiene Regulations as above as risk assessed Inspection Fee for premises used for one day licence $52.00 Establishment Fee for inspections/reports prior to approval of any registerable premises $ Re-assessment Fee $52.00 All other Registered Premises not elsewhere specified (A fee equal to the Base Fee) $ Mobile Shops and Hawkers also applies to things other than food. $ Gaming machine class 4 venue consent $ Inspection of any Registered premises on request $180.00

118 Council Agenda Page Liquor Licensing The following Liquor Licensing fees are set by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulation On-Licences, Off-Licences and Club Liquor Licences Fees framework for On-Licences, Off-Licences, and Club Licences (1) The fees payable by a licensee or an applicant in respect of premises for which an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence is held or sought comprise of: (a) an application fee; and (b) an annual fee. (2) Premises for which an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence is held or sought will be classified by the Council on the basis of the premises' cost/risk rating, and the fees category for the premises. Cost/risk rating of premises (1) The Council will assign a cost/risk rating to the premises for which an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence is held or sought. (2) The cost/risk rating of premises is the sum of the highest applicable weighting in each of subclauses (3) to (5). (3) The weightings relating to the type of licensed premises are as follows: Licence held or sought Type of premises Weighting On-licence Class 1 restaurant, night club, tavern, adult premises 15 On-licence Class 2 restaurant, hotel, function centre 10 On-licence Class 3 restaurant, other premises not otherwise specified 5 On-licence BYO restaurants, theatres, cinemas, winery cellar doors 2 Off-licence Supermarket, grocery store, bottle store 15 Off-licence Hotel, tavern 10 Off-licence Class 1, 2, or 3 club, remote sale premises, premises not otherwise specified 5 Off-licence Winery cellar doors 2 Club licence Class 1 club 10 Club licence Class 2 club 5 Club licence Class 3 club 2

119 Council Agenda Page 124 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 21 (4) The weightings relating to the latest alcohol sales time allowed for premises are as follows: Type of premises Premises for which an on-licence or club licence is held or sought Latest trading time allowed by licence (during 24- hour period from 6 am to 6 am) Weighting 2 am or earlier 0 Between 2.01 am and 3 am 3 Any time after 3 am 5 Premises for which an off-licence is held or sought (other than remote sales premises) 10 pm or earlier 0 Any time after 10 pm 3 Remote sales premises Not applicable 0 (5) The weightings relating to the number of enforcement holdings in respect of the premises in the last 18 months are as follows: Number of enforcement holdings in last 18 months (applies to all types of premises) Weighting None or more 20 (6) Definition of type of premises - BYO restaurant Class 1 club Class 2 club Class 3 club Class 1 restaurant Class 2 restaurant Class 3 restaurant Enforcement holding Remote sales premises means a restaurant for which an on-licence is or will be endorsed under section 37 of the Act. means a club that has or applies for a club licence and (a) (b) has at least 1000 members of purchase age; and in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates any part of the premises in the nature of a tavern at any time. means a club that has or applies for a club licence and is not a class 1 or class 3 club. means a club that has or applies for a club licence and (a) (b) has fewer than 250 members of purchase age; and in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates a bar for no more than 40 hours each week. means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and (a) has, in the opinion of the territorial authority, a significant separate bar area; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates that bar area, at least 1 night a week, in the manner of a tavern. means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and (a) has, in the opinion of the territorial authority, a separate bar; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, does not operate that bar area in the manner of a tavern at any time. means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and that, in the opinion of the territorial authority, only serves alcohol to the table and does not have a separate bar area. means a holding as defined in section 288 of the Act, or an offence under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 for which a holding could have been made if the conduct had occurred after 18 December means premises for which an off-licence is or will be endorsed under section 40 of the Act.

120 Council Agenda Page Fees categories for premises (1) The Council will assign a fees category to any premises for which an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence is held or sought. (2) The fees category must be assigned in accordance with the following table, except as provided in subclause (4): Cost/risk rating of premises Fees category 0 2 Very low 3 5 Low 6 15 Medium High 26 plus Very high (3) The date on which the fees category for premises must be determined is (a) for the purpose of an application fee, the day on which the application is made; and (b) for the purpose of the annual fee, the day on which the annual fee is payable. (4) The Council may, in its discretion and in response to particular circumstances, assign a fees category to premises that is 1 level lower than the fees category determined under subclause (1); but no premises may be assigned a category lower than very low. Fees payable for premises in each fees category (1) The application fees and annual fees are as follows: Fees category for premises Application fee including GST Annual fee (including GST) Very low $ $ Low $ $ Medium $ $ High $ $ Very high $ $ Special Liquor Licence Special Licence Classes and Fees Special licence class Issued in respect of Fee (including GST) Class 1 1 large event more than 3 medium events $ more than 12 small events Class 2 3 to 12 small events 1 to 3 medium events $ Class 3 1 or 2 small events $63.25 large event means an event that the territorial authority believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of more than 400 people medium event means an event that the territorial authority believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of between 100 and 400 people small event means an event that the territorial authority believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of fewer than 100 people. The Council may, in its discretion and in response to particular circumstances, charge a fee for a special licence that is 1 class below the class of the licence that is issued; but no fee may be less than the fee payable for a class 3 special licence.

121 Council Agenda Page 126 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 23 Manager s Certificates The fee to accompany an application for a new manager's certificate, or for a renewal of a manager's certificate, is $ inclusive of GST. Other fees payable Type Temporary authority to carry on the sale and supply of alcohol Temporary licence to sell alcohol pursuant to a licence from premises other than the premises to which the licence relates Permanent club charters Fee (including GST) $ $ Application fee $ Annual fee Extract from register $57.50 Application for Building Certificate Liquor $ Application for Planning Certificate of Compliance Liquor $ Noise Control District-wide Noise Control fees Pursuant to Section 333 of the Resource Management, 1991 the Council is able to set a fee for the costs incurred when seizing equipment that is the source of justified noise complaints. The Council s policy is that for the first impounding of such equipment a fee of $ is payable before the equipment can be collected. Noise Control (seizure of items under RMA) Fee First impounding equipment returned $ Second impounding equipment not returned at all -

122 Council Agenda Page RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Please note that all Fees and Charges are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated. The Council charges fees for resource consent application processing and other procedures under section 36 of the Resource Management Act 1991, and this allows for an initial deposit or base fee to be charged to the applicant. Then if the base fee does not fully cover the actual and reasonable costs of processing the consent, the Council will recover those costs with an additional charge. This additional charge is based on the time spent by the processing officers and the time taken to complete the application, minus the initial deposit fee paid. While section 36 provides the authorisation for the Council to set fees and charges under the Act, section 36(2) also requires that the fees be subject to the Special Consultative Procedure as prescribed by section 83 of the Local Government Act District-wide Resource Management fees Resource Management Act, 1991 Fee Non-notified resource consents/designation applications Subdivisions $1, Land Use $1, Designations $1, Alteration to a designation $ Removal of a designation $ District Plan change $10, Notified resource consents/designations Limited notified subdivisions $2, Limited notified land use $2, Publicly notified subdivisions $5, Publicly notified land use $5, Designations, including alteration and removal $1, Non-notified subdivision, land use and designation of minor nature Non-notified, land use and designations of a minor nature $ Minor side/rear yard or daylight departure (with neighbour s approval) $ Certificates of Compliance Certificates of Compliance/ Existing Use Right Certificates $ Resource management planning certificates under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act $ Amendment to consent conditions and amended consent application Requiring engineering consideration $ Not requiring engineering consideration $ Application for extensions of time $ Monitoring Monitoring - first inspection $ Monitoring - each additional inspection $ Monitoring - administration $110.00

123 Council Agenda Page 128 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 25 Resource Management Act, 1991 Certificates Section 221 Consent Notice $ Section 221 Change or cancellation of Consent Notice $ Section 223 Survey Plan $ Section 226 Title registration $ Section 222 Completion $ Section 243 Easement approvals and cancellation report and certificate $ Section 224 Title (not requiring engineering consideration) $ Section 224 Title (requiring engineering consideration) $ Hearing Commissioners Independent Hearings Commissioner Hearing/Decision (Independent Commissioner) requested by applicant Section 100A of the RMA Hearing/Decision (Independent Commissioner) requested by submitter Section 100A of the RMA Other Fee Actual charge plus 5 percent $ $ applicant $ submitter base fee Outline Plans $ Bond documentation Minor Works Bond preparation by Council. $ Bond documentation Release of bond documents $ Bond or Easement Documentation prepared by Council s solicitors $ Review of Consent Conditions Section 128 RMA $ Other Legislation Fee Local Government Act 2002 Rights of Way Application Fee $ Rights of Way Certification Fee $ Official Local Government Information and Meetings Act 1987 Land Information Memoranda (LIM) $ Urgent Land Information Memoranda $ Overseas Investment Regulations 2005 Overseas Investment Certificate $ Note: The above fees are deposit fees. All costs associated with processing the application and monitoring the issued consent over and above the deposit fee will be directly charged to the applicant or refunded if applicable. Hourly Rates Fee Planner $ Senior Planner $ District Planner $ Administration $85.00 Engineering At cost Disbursements At cost General Consultants Actual charge

124 Council Agenda Page Stock Impounding District-wide stock impounding fees Stock Impounding (Fees set under the provision of The Impounding Act 1955) Stallion, ass, mule or bull over the age of nine months $30.00 Mare, gelding, colt, filly, foal, ox, cow, steer, heifer or calf $25.00 Ram, ewe, wether, lamb or goat $15.00 Boar, sow or other pig* $35.00 Deer $25.00 Sustenance fee per day or part day $5.00 * Note that the fee for the pig category is recommended to be significantly higher because of the potential damage that could be caused to the pound facilities. Fee Stock Callouts Following charges apply for each impounding occurrence and for stock on roads callouts, whether or not the stock is impounded. Fee Animal Control Officer $ Advertising Actual cost Repeat impounding Double the per day charge Transportation and cost of attendance, call out and vehicle charges At Cost Trespass on any paddock, meadow, grass or stubble Fee Horse, mare, gelding, colt, filly, foal, bull, cow, steer, heifer, calf, ass, mule or deer $2.50 Ram, ewe, wether or lamb $1.00 Goat, boar, sow or other pig $6.00 Trespass on any land having thereon any growing crop or from which the crop has not been removed or in any reserve, cemetery or burial ground Fee Horse, mare, gelding, colt, filly, foal, bull, cow, steer, heifer, calf, ass, mule or deer $6.00 Ram, ewe, wether or lamb $1.50 Goat, boar, sow or other pig $12.00

125 Council Agenda Page 130 Draft 2016/17 Fees and Charges 27 CORPORATE SERVICES Please note that all Fees and Charges are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated. Corporate Services fees Service A4 A3 A2 A1 A0 Photocopying Colour $0.50 $0.75 Black & White $0.30 $0.50 Printing Linework only (including plans) $3.00 $3.50 $7.50 $10.00 $15.00 Imagery (including GIS prints) $3.00 $3.50 $15.00 $25.00 $50.00 Rate and Water details (WINZ and other) No Charge Rates Notices No Charge Dog Notices No Charge Scanning Per Scan A2 and above $5.00 $5.00 $5.00 Electronic Information Fee Note Information by CD *$20.00 * This cost only covers the information being saved on to the Information by *$3.00 type of electronic device or ed. A separate rate will apply for time spent on collating and preparing information to Information on USB drive *$30.00 be saved to the device in this case the Official Information Requests OIA rate will apply. Official Information Requests Fee Initial charge for the first chargeable half hour or part thereof $40.00 For each additional half hour or part thereof. $40.00 Photocopy fees - as per standard fees and charges Document Management and Control Title: 2016/17 Fees and Charges Sponsor: Approved By: Strategic Planning & Projects Manager Hauraki District Council - pending Adopted: Review Date: Version: File Ref: Pending 30 June 2017/18 Draft v.tbd Property of Hauraki District Council

126 Council Agenda Page PO Box 17, William Street, Paeroa Phone (07) , or from within the Hauraki District Fax (07) Website info@hauraki-dc.govt.nz

127 Council Agenda Page 132 (As shown in the track change version of Section 5.17 attached at Appendix A).

128 Council Agenda Page 133

129 Council Agenda Page 134

130 Council Agenda Page 135, (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

131 Council Agenda Page 136 (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

132 Council Agenda Page 137 accessory uses buildings Permitted ControlledRestricted DiscretionaryDiscretionaryNon ComplyingProhibited Permitted Activity Zone Development Standards CONDITIONS CONDITIONS PASSIVE RECREATION ACTIVITIES (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

133 Council Agenda Page 138 PROSPECTINGEXPLORATION FARMING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS TEMPORARY USES AND BUILDINGS TEMPORARY USES AND BUILDINGS zoneconditions Controlled Activity Zone Development Standards Conditions CONTROLLED ACTIVITIES (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

134 Council Agenda Page 139 Restricted Discretionary Activity Council Restricted Discretionary Activity PERMITTED ACTIVITIESZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDSPERMITTED ACTIVITY ZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDSRESTRICTED DISCRETIONARY ACTIVITY Council Council Zone Development Standards HeightDaylighting site site buildingssite site amenity site amenities amenity building building (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

135 Council Agenda Page 140 Yards site site site site road yard yardlandscaping site Zone coverage amenity landscaping height site building(s)amenity PERMITTED ACTIVITY Council mining (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

136 Council Agenda Page 141 Discretionary Activity Discretionary Activity PERMITTED ACTIVITIESZONE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RESTRICTED DISCRETIONARY ACTIVITY UNDERGROUNDSURFACE MININGMININGOPERATIONS PERMITTED ACTIVITY Non Complying Activity. PERMITTEDCONTROLLEDRESTRICTED DISCRETIONARYDISCRETIONARY ACTIVITY Prohibited Activity. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES Zone Development StandardsPermitted Activities conditions Zone Development StandardsPermitted Activities Restricted Discretionary Activities DiscretionaryNon Complying Activities * Height height buildings zone amenity zonebuilding zone (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

137 Council Agenda Page 142 * Daylight Control Yards building height zone zone height. Front Yard zone road zone Other Yards sensitivezone Front Yard zone road zone Other Yards building buildings site amenitieszone Zone Coverage building gross floor area building gross floor area buildings amenity zone Zone Development StandardsTemporary Uses and Buildings Temporary Uses and BuildingsProspecting Exploration zone Discretionary ActivityCouncil development standardspermitted Restricted Discretionary Activities zone development standards Council zonecouncil mining conditionszone development standards (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

138 Council Agenda Page 143 landscapingmining operations mininglandscaping site mining roads environment mining environment communityfacilities (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

139 Council Agenda Page 144 (Words in italics in rules and assessment criteria are defined in Section 4.0 Definitions)

140 Council Agenda Page 145

141 Council Agenda Page 146

142 Council Agenda Page 147

143 Council Agenda Page 148 Expenditure Less Revenue 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Leadership Networks Community Services Community Development Regulatory Year to date Budget to Date

144 Council Agenda Page 149

145 Council Agenda Page /05/2016 Summary of Leadership for the 10 months ending 30/04/2016 YTD BTD % of YTD YTD Variance Annual Budget Budget ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) Expenditure Democracy 1,386 1, % 0 1,696 Iwi Liaison 20 [1] 56 35% Policy Development 480 [2] % Total Cost of Service 1,886 2,040 92% 153 2,482 Less Revenue Democracy 0 0 0% 0 0 Policy Development (2) 0 0% 2 0 Total Revenue (2) 0 0% 2 0 Total Cost of Service (3) 0 0% 3 0 NET COST OF SERVICE 1,883 2,040 92% 157 2,482 Notes to report 1 2 Iwi Liaison expenditure is lower than expected due to the local Iwi focus on Treaty of Waitangi negotiations, resulting in Forum and partnership meetings being deferred. RMA Policy expenditure is lower than expected due to Kaiaua Plan work which has not commenced yet, and is unlikely to this year. Summary of Networks for the 10 months ending 30/04/2016 YTD BTD % of YTD YTD Variance Annual Budget Budget ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) Expenditure Land Drainage 640 [3] % 179 1,034 Roading 6,383 [4] 6,690 95% 307 8,184 Solid Waste % Stormwater % Wastewater 2,245 [5] 2,364 95% 119 3,065 Water 5,041 [6] 4, % (82) 6,255 Total Cost of Service 15,300 15,902 96% ,202 Less Revenue Roading (1,859) [7] (2,430) 76% (571) (3,275) Solid Waste (90) (121) 74% (31) (128) Stormwater 0 0 0% 0 0 Wastewater (38) (33) 114% 5 (40) Water (3,469) [8] (1,753) 198% 1,716 (1,753) Total Cost of Service (5,455) (4,337) 126% 1,119 (5,196) NET COST OF SERVICE 9,845 11,566 85% 1,721 15,007 Notes to report Land Drainage - Pump expenditure is lower than expected due to fewer than expected significant weather events this year. Mechanical Cleaning shows a saving caused by reduced demand for weed clearance of drains especially in Tirohia. Roading - Pavement Maintenance is currently underspent, and will be at the end of the year, due to delays in the pre-seal repairs programme. Wastewater - Major Maintenance expenditure is lower than expected due to fewer emergency events than were budgeted for. Water - Water Treatment has experienced some taste and dirty water issues which has led to increased costs. Roading Income - This is due to the $300k forecast underspend in operating expenditure and also timing of the delivery of subsidisable capital projects. The main change affecting the capital projects is the deferral of the Turua Area Wide Treatment project to next year. The subsidy available for this project will be able to be transferred to next year. Water Income - The Ministry of Health subsidy income for the Paeroa and Waihi WTP upgrades has been received. Some of this income was not budgeted to be received until 2016/17.

146 Council Agenda Page 151 Summary of Community Services for the 10 months ending 30/04/ /05/2016 YTD BTD % of YTD YTD Variance Annual Budget Budget ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) Expenditure Community Facilities 1,342 1,351 99% 10 1,719 Recreation 3,254 3, % (26) 3,834 Total Cost of Service 4,596 4, % (17) 5,553 Less Revenue Community Facilities (358) (363) 99% (5) (436) Recreation (106) (117) 90% (11) (134) Total Revenue (464) (480) 97% (16) (570) NET COST OF SERVICE 4,132 4, % (33) 4,983 Notes to report Summary of Community Development for the 10 months ending 30/04/2016 YTD BTD % of YTD Budget YTD Variance ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) Expenditure Community Growth % 3 Community Initiatives 801 [9] % (53) Total Cost of Service 1,611 1, % (50) Less Revenue Community Growth (2) 0 0% 2 Community Initiatives 0 0 0% 0 Total Revenue (2) 0 0% 2 Annual Budget ($ 000's) ,817 NET COST OF SERVICE 1,609 1, % (49) 1, Notes to report 9 Community Initiatives - The $54,000 upgrade of the Cycleway Tunnel Lights was unbudgeted expenditure. (This project will be funded from the District Community Project Assistance Fund.) Summary of Regulatory for the 10 months ending 30/04/2016 YTD BTD % of YTD YTD Variance Annual Budget Budget ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) ($ 000's) Expenditure Animal Control % Building Services % 4 1,011 Community Protection % (0) 840 RMA Implementation % (4) 775 Total Cost of Service 2,544 2, % 2 3,100 Less Revenue Animal Control (286) (277) 103% 8 (281) Building Services (509) [10] (333) 153% 176 (400) Community Protection (74) (59) 127% 16 (74) RMA Implementation (378) [11] (229) 165% 149 (275) Total Cost of Service (1,248) (899) 139% 349 (1,030) NET COST OF SERVICE 1,296 1,648 79% 351 2,070 Notes to report Building Services -Building income is higher than expected due to increased building inspection activity. RMA Implementation - Higher than expected activity around Land Use Consent and LIMs.

147 Council Agenda Page 152

148 Council Agenda Page 153

149 Council Agenda Page 154

150 Council Agenda Page 155

151 Council Agenda Page 156

152 Council Agenda Page 157

153 Council Agenda Page 158

154 Council Agenda Page 159

155 Council Agenda Page 160 That the Annual Report is completed, audited and adopted by Council by 31 st October, each year. That all issues subject to a special consultative procedure meet the requirements of the Local Government Act, 99% of all notified resource consent applications are decided and issued within 70 working days. All non-notified consent decisions, not requiring a hearing, are issued within 20 working days.

156 Council Agenda Page 161 Issue building consents within statutory timeframes. 100% of all building consents are issued within statutory timeframes - 20 working days

157 Council Agenda Page 162 All LIMs are issued within statutory timeframes All LIMS are issued within 10 working days

158 Council Agenda Page 163

159 Council Agenda Page 164

160 Council Agenda Page 165 WAIKATO PLAN JOINT COMMITTEE Minutes of the Waikato Plan Joint Committee to be held at 1:00pm on 18 April 2016 at Don Rowlands Event Centre, 601 Maungatautari Road, RD2 Cambridge MEMBERS: Ten (10) local government members from the following constituent local authorities within the Waikato region Chairperson Margaret Devlin Hamilton City Council, Mayor J Hardaker Hauraki District Council, Mayor T Adams (acting) Matamata-Piako District Council, Mayor J Barnes Otorohanga District Council, Mayor M Baxter South Waikato District Council, Mayor N Sinclair Taupo District Council, Councillor A Parkes Waikato District Council, Mayor A Sanson Waikato Regional Council, Chairperson P Southgate Waipa District Council, Mayor J Mylchreest Waitomo District Council Mayor B Hanna Five (5) non-local government members B Gatenby S Wilson M Ingle OBSERVERS: ADVISORS/ STAFF: Cr M Gallagher, Cr P Buckley, Cr R Klos, Cr C St Pierre Harry Wilson, New Zealand Transport Agency Project Advisors (K Tremaine, and B Wasley), Democracy Advisor (A Williams, Waikato Regional Council) Hauraki District (C Mischewski), Taupo District ( N Carroll), Waikato District (V Ramduny), Waikato Region (T May) APOLOGIES: Mayor J Tregidga (Hauraki District Council), Mayor D Trewavas (Taupo District Council), Cr B Simcock (Waikato District Health Board), (M Spaans (Non-LG Member), Richard Ward (National Infrastructure Unit, Treasury) Accepted Doc #

161 Council Agenda Page 166 Confirmation of Agenda (Agenda item 1) RESOLVED THAT the agenda of the Waikato Spatial Plan Joint Committee of 18 April 2016 be confirmed as the business for the meeting. Moved Mayor B Hanna/seconded Mayor A Sanson The motion was put and carried (WSP16/04) Disclosures of Interest (Agenda item 2) There were no disclosures of interest Updated Strategic Direction Summary document for adoption File: (Agenda item 3) Doc # Presented by Project Advisor (Ken Tremaine) the report provided the Waikato Plan Joint Committee with the amended strategic direction document for adoption. All feedback from previous meetings had been incorporated and was also summarised in the appendix of the bi-monthly report. Chair (Margaret Devlin) took the Committee through a page turn and the following feedback was provided: It was noted that the aim is to get the document as complete as possible, but there is still the opportunity for amendments once the full Plan is developed. There was a suggestion that the photography libraries held by the Councils could be used in the final document. An overall vision statement would be included at the start of the document, this had not yet been fully developed. The document would need to be reviewed in respect of Maori grammar and spelling. Page 6: At paragraph 3 of the background, references to community and iwi engagement was to be included. Page 8: It was suggested that the words cutting duplication be replaced with a more positive phrase. Page 9: It was questioned whether the Critical Success Factors section distracts from key priorities by being included upfront in the summary document. It was requested that the development of funding plans be included in the third paragraph in the implementation. Page 9: It was suggested that under review it be specified that a pulse check update be undertaken annually, with a more robust review be undertaken three yearly. Six years was too long. Page 10: It was commented that the narrative on this page was too repetitive. It was suggested that it be edited without losing the balance and core concepts. Doc # Page 2

162 Council Agenda Page 167 Page 10: The first paragraph refers to see page 12, this should be page11 and 12. Page 11: In regards to how will we monitor success, it was suggested that the different dates could be confusing to readers and they should align with other key timeframes eg: the census. Page 11: Concern was noted regarding the word Proud in the narrative at the start of the page. It was suggested this was immeasurable and should be replaced. Page 11: In the Who Will Do it box Philanthropic (non government) organisation should be replaced with Community and Philanthropic Organisations. Page 12: Regarding the entities contained in the Who will do it boxes; there was concern that the views and values of the noted organisations might not align with the plan. This could be rephrased as Who will help. The Committee was advised that the strategy behind drafting in this way was to make it clear who would implement each step. Once the plan is completed, there will be engagement with stakeholders and relationship building would begin. Page 12: Under How will we monitor and measure success, it was suggested that some of the more specific transport projects should be replaced with high level outcomes. The example given was to aim for a drive time of less than 2.5 hours between Auckland and Tauranga, but leave the methods for achieving this as a task for the Regional Transport Committee. It was suggested that the connections priority section should remain at a high level, and the Waikato Plan should support the development of the Regional Transport Plan. Page 13: Co-governance arrangements also referred to Committees operating under joint management agreements. Page 13: It was noted that only one of the measures was time bound and others need to be also. Page 13: In the definition, economic and social aspirations were not mentioned. Page 14: It was requested that the Water priority section align with, and refer to the Healthy Rivers and Let s Talk Water work being undertaken by the Regional Council. Page 14: There was discussion that the Water priority section needs to focus on the effective use or, and effective allocation of water. Page 14: Under What results are we looking for, the Committee noted that there was already a regional approach to water allocation discussion being undertaken, and this needs to be made clear in the document. Page 14: The who will do it box should include references to the wider community. Page 14: There was concern that the 80 years referred to in the How will we monitor success paragraph was too far away to be meaningful. It was suggested interim measures be included such as the finding from the Healthy Rivers project. Page 14: It was suggested that plans for urban water management be considered. Page 14: The issue of access to other sources of water and maximum potential use of water had not been considered. The Committee suggested it be made clear that the river is not an infinite source of water and this needed to be considered as the region is dependent on water for its economic success. Doc # Page 3

163 Council Agenda Page 168 Page 15: Under our connections and relationships, it was suggested that the third bullet include Taranaki. The Chair thanked the staff for their hard work on this document and the Committee for their input. The five initiatives for areas of expected population decline File: (Agenda item 4) Doc # Presented by Project Advisor (Ken Tremaine) the report provided the Waikato Plan Joint Committee with further information on the nature and scope of the five model projects in the executive summary of the Waikato Plan. The Committee was also provided with the details of each Council s five preferred projects. During discussion and feedback, the following points were noted The Committee raised concerns that the research behind the proposed objectives had not been provided along with the project options. The Committee was advised that additional thinking on criteria for selecting projects would be developed by the project team. It was noted that these projects were how we would deliver on the priority area responding to population change. A lot of the projects were interrelated and some could be combined with others. It was suggested that projects focus on what exists currently and where the strengths are already within both the public and community sector. The responding to population change projects needed to deliver on the results outlined at page 11 of the plan, the Committee suggested that the projects that are chosen need to align with the goals before they can be confirmed. Matamata-Piako District Council noted their opinion that the projects proposed would not address population decline and that there should be more focus on projects to stimulate growth. Moving forward the Committee agreed that the initial projects (many others would fit under these) could be filtered down to include: The stocktake of the existing service delivery services. These services would need to be defined. Regional infrastructure plan. The enablers and barriers to service delivery Distinct characteristics for the Waikato region These would be further fleshed out by the project team and alignment with the outcomes as established at page 11 of the plan would be confirmed. If there was a need to come back to the Committee to consider other projects, this could be done. Waikato Plan bi-monthly report File: (Agenda item 5) Doc # and Presented by Project Advisor (Ken Tremaine) the report provided the Waikato Plan Joint Committee with an update on and seeks input into key areas of the Waikato Plan project. During discussion, the following points were noted: Doc # Page 4

164 Council Agenda Page 169 It was suggested that the time frame for the scoping phase, may be too long. The intention is that the Waikato Plan works in parallel with the Council s Long Term Plans and Annual Plans as opposed to expecting Council s to adjust their plans to align with the Waikato Plan once it is established. RESOLVED THAT the Waikato Plan Joint Committee: 1. Note the update on the three initial projects. 2. Note the Aligned Planning report and agree that the CE Steering Group create an action plan and this be reported back to the Joint Committee in June. 3. Provide feedback on the draft Aligned Planning Next Steps Project Plan. 4. Adopt the updated Strategic Direction Summary Document as the basis for drafting the Waikato Plan. 5. Note the invitation by the Independent Chair to the Trust Board Chairs to participate in representation hui with the aim of Joint Committee representation being confirmed at the June meeting. 6. Note the feedback received from the Strategic Partners Forum. 7. Note the update on the project budget. Confirmation of Previous Minutes File: (Agenda item 6) Doc # Moved Mayor B Hanna/seconded Mayor A Sanson The motion was put and carried (WSP16/05) The Chairs noted that the minutes of the meeting held on 22 February 2016 had been circulated to members. RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Waikato Spatial Plan Joint Committee held on 22 February 2016 be confirmed as a true and correct record. Moved Cr P Southgate/seconded Mayor B Hanna The motion was put and carried (WSP16/06)) Other Business It was suggested that the next meeting be held at the University or the Waikato Regional Council office. Meeting closed at 2:45pm. Doc # Page 5

165 Council Agenda Page 170

166 Council Agenda Page 171

167 Council Agenda Page 172

168 Council Agenda Page 173

169 Council Agenda Page 174

170 Council Agenda Page 175

171 Council Agenda Page 176

172 Council Agenda Page 177

173 Council Agenda Page 178

174 Council Agenda Page 179

175 Council Agenda Page 180

176 Council Agenda Page 181

177 Council Agenda Page 182

178 Council Agenda Page 183

179 Council Agenda Page 184

180 Council Agenda Page 185

181 Council Agenda Page 186 where the customer requires a response where the customer requires a response

182 where the customer requires a response, Council Agenda Page 187

183 Council Agenda Page 188

184 Council Agenda Page 189

185 Council Agenda Page 190

186 Council Agenda Page 191 NOTE: This result reports on a Council representative attending BA5 meetings (the method of measurement). While the target specifies the number of meetings, the number of meetings held is beyond the Council's control. A Council representative will attend 100% of meetings held.

187 Council Agenda Page 192

188 Council Agenda Page 193

189 Council Agenda Page 194

190 Council Agenda Page 195

191 Council Agenda Page 196

192 Council Agenda Page 197

193 Council Agenda Page 198

194 Council Agenda Page 199

195 Council Agenda Page 200

196 Council Agenda Page 201

197 Council Agenda Page 202

198 Council Agenda Page 203

199 Council Agenda Page 204

200 Council Agenda Page 205

201 Council Agenda Page 206

202 Council Agenda Page 207

203 Council Agenda Page 208

204 Council Agenda Page 209

205 Council Agenda Page 210

206 Council Agenda Page 211

207 Council Agenda Page 212 [individual resolutions be passed for each submission including any comments the Council wishes to be included in the response to submitters (which might be the staff comments)]

208 Council Agenda Page 213

209 Council Agenda Page 214

210 Council Agenda Page 215

211 Council Agenda Page 216

212 Council Agenda Page 217

213 Council Agenda Page 218 Note: Public places include, but are not limited to Council recreation reserves, beaches, road reserve, town centres, residential and industrial areas and those sections of the Hauraki Rail Trail where dogs are not prohibited. Note: This prohibition is a requirement of the resource consent granted for the build of the Hauraki Rail Trail and is intended to protect farm animals from potential nuisances created by dogs.

214 Council Agenda Page 219 Note: This area of beach is recognised by the Department of Conservation as a significant New Zealand Dotterel breeding site. Note: Outside these hours but within these dates dogs may be exercised off leash. Note: Outside these hours but within these dates this area is prohibited to dogs. Note: Outside these hours but within these dates dogs must be on a lead in this area.

215 Council Agenda Page 220 Note: This area is an internationally significant wetland.

216 Council Agenda Page 221

217 Council Agenda Page 222

218 Council Agenda Page 223

219 Council Agenda Page 224

220 Council Agenda Page 225

221 Council Agenda Page 226

222 Council Agenda Page 227 Note: Other clauses in Part 3: Public Safety are not being reviewed at this point in time.

223 Council Agenda Page 228

224 Council Agenda Page 229

225 Council Agenda Page 230

226 Council Agenda Page 231

227 Council Agenda Page 232

228 Council Agenda Page 233

229 Council Agenda Page 234

230 Council Agenda Page 235

231 Council Agenda Page 236

232 Council Agenda Page 237 Note: The Dog Control Act 1996 requires dangerous dogs to be kept in a securely fenced portion of an owner s property that it is not necessary to enter to obtain access to at least one (1) door of any dwelling on the property.

233 Council Agenda Page 238

234 Council Agenda Page 239 Note: Outside these hours but within these dates this area is prohibited to dogs. Note: Outside these hours but within these dates dogs must be on a lead in this area. Explanatory Note: On Leash Dog Areas As outlined in this Bylaw, in any public place in the Hauraki District, but excluding a designated dog exercise area or an area prohibited to dogs, dogs must be kept on a leash at all times. Public places include, but are not limited to; Council recreation reserves, beaches, road reserve, town centres, residential and industrial areas and those sections of the Hauraki Rail Trail and the Waihi to Waihi Beach cycleway where dogs are not prohibited. Entry to land under the control of the Department of Conservation may be restricted. Owners should consult with the Department of Conservation prior to entering land under the Departments control

235 Council Agenda Page 240 Note: This area of beach is recognised by the Department of Conservation as a significant New Zealand Dotterel breeding site. Note: Outside these hours but within these dates dogs may be exercised off leash.

236 Council Agenda Page 241

237 Council Agenda Page 242

238 Council Agenda Page 243

239 Council Agenda Page 244

240 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 1 Hauraki District Council Hearing of Submissions on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and Draft Dog Control Bylaw Wednesday, 25 May 2016 Hearing to be held at the Council Chambers, William Street, Paeroa from 1.00pm

241 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 2 Table of Contents Submitters speaking in support of their written submission... 3 Timetable of submitter s speaking to their submission... 3 DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION - KEN BROWN... 4 PETER THOMAS HUDSON... 7 TRACEY WAKEFIELD... 9 JOHN COATES...11 INGRID BROEKHALS...13 DENNIS MOLLER and PAULINE MOLLER...15 DEREK HARDY FRANK GAUSDEN BRIAN HABBERFIELD Written Submissions (not speaking)... GARY DAVIDSON LYNN GREEN BARRY AND JANICE CHRISTIANSEN KATHLEEN DIGGINS KAREN HART CORALIE JOYCE PAMELA MCLEAN JOHN MUNRO DIANNA STALLINGER MONICA VAN OOSTROM ANDREW WESTGATE KAREN SALES ALISON ROOT KRYSTAL GLEN MIKE BALSOM MATT GLEN LIANNE POTTER BRETT POTTER MELISSA PILKINTON HEATHER PRINCE JANE BARLOW WENDY MERRICK WENDY JOY BAKER MICHAEL LOUIS VINE... 76

242 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 3 SUSAN BARBARA VINE SHERYL HELLYER BERNARD DUNCKER and RAEWYN ADAMS MARY ELIZABETH BEVAN TESSA KOSTYRKA DAWN SINCLAIR Submitters speaking in support of their written submission Timetable of submitter s speaking to their submission Time Submitter Speaker Page 1:10p.m. DEPARTMENT OF Ken Brown CONSERVATION 1:20p.m. PETER HUDSON Peter Hudson 1:30p.m. TRACEY WAKEFIELD Tracey Wakefield 1:40p.m. JOHN COATES John Coates 1:50p.m. INGRID BROEKHALS Ingrid Broekhals 2:00p.m. DENNIS MOLLER and Dennis and Pauline Moller PAULINE MOLLER 2:10p.m. DEREK HARDY Derek Hardy 2:20p.m. FRANK GAUSDEN Frank Gausden 2:30p.m. BRIAN HABBERFIELD Brian Habberfield

243 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 4 Name of Submitter DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION - KEN BROWN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 33.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach Southern End 33.2 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposal for the prohibition of dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach as it is a significant nesting site for the NZ dotterel as this ecological area has species of specific significance that are highly threatened by the presence of dogs. There are currently five of the seven resident dotterel pairs at Whiritoa nest in this area. Decision Sought That Council adopts the prohibition of dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach including the definition of the area and description. Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposed dog prohibition period from the remaining area of Whiritoa beach to allow some time where nesting and/or young dotterel chicks can feed without the distraction and harassment of dogs. The submitter's support is noted and staff thank the Department of Conservation for the input and time that they have contributed to the policy and bylaw review process. The submitter's support is noted Prohibited Areas for Dogs Miranda/ Pukorokoro to south of Kaiaua Decision Sought That Council adopt the prohibition of dogs from Whiritoa Beach, including the lagoon, from the period of December 20 to March 1 and including public holidays between the hours of 9am and 7pm. Reason for Request The submitter supports the continuation of dogs being prohibited from the area east of East Coast road, including the beach, from the District boundary at Miranda/Pukorokoro to the southern boundary of Kaiaua township as identified by the 50km/hr sign, as this area is a significant ecological area internationally recognised wetland habitat for many species, that are highly threatened by the presence of dogs. The submitter's support is noted Dog attacks on protected species Decision Sought That Council adopt the prohibition of dogs from the beach area, defined as east of the boundary of East Coast road to the mean low water spring, from the District boundary at Miranda/Pukorokoro to, the southern boundary of Kaiaua, which is defined by the southern 50 kilometre per hour speed limit sign. Reason for Request The submitter notes that the Department of Conservation will consider taking legal action under the Wildlife Act should any dog attack a NZ dotterel, especially while nesting, or any other protected bird species. Decision Sought That Council s dog control rangers immediately notify and consult with the Department of Conservation when a dog attacks a NZ dotterel, especially while nesting, or any other protected bird species. The submitter's comments are noted. This request has been passed on to the Group Manager Planning and Environmental Services, the Regulatory Services Manager and Council's dog control officers. This sharing of information will be undertaken as part of the Council s operating procedures.

244 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 5

245 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 6

246 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 7 Name of Submitter: PETER THOMAS HUDSON # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 18.1 Responsible The submitter's comments are noted. Owner Licence (ROL) Reason for Request The submitter suggests that a dog owner of any dog breed should have a Responsible Owner Licence as this would ensure that only responsible people can own a dog which would benefit the public and the welfare of the dog. Decision Sought That Council amend the Dog Control Policy and Bylaw to ensure that any person that wants to own a dog will need to apply and qualify for a Responsible Owner Licence. The Responsible Owner Licence scheme is not compulsory but the Council provides additional incentives to dog owners that undertake the training. In New Zealand people do not need a licence/training to own a dog. However if a person is convicted of a dog related offence under specific legislation, or if a person commits three or more infringement offences within a continuous 24 month period against the Dog Control Act 1996 of the Council s Bylaw, then the Council may classify that person as a probationary dog owner for a 24 month period. A person may also be disqualified from owning a dog in certain circumstances.

247 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 8 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Peter Hudson OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I have seen that there is a responsible ownership licence of menacing dogs in the proposals i would like to see this extend to all breeds of dog and to all people in rural and urban environments this will ensure that only responsible people willing to under go the licencing will be able to have a dog, this is not only for the benefit of the public but also for the welfare of the dogs If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 14 Apr 16 13:34:57 1/1

248 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 9 Name of Submitter TRACEY WAKEFIELD # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 36.1 Responsible Owner Licence (ROL) Menacing dogs Reason for Request The submitter suggests that owners of menacing dogs, classified because of their breed, should undertake the Responsible Owner Licence programme. Decision Sought That any owner of menacing dog classified because of its breed, should undertake the Responsible Owner Licence programme. The submitter's support and comments are noted. While the Council has not proposed to make it compulsory that owner's of menacing dogs, classified as such because of their breed, under take the Responsible Owner Licence programme the Council hopes more dog owners will undertake the programme.

249 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 10

250 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 11 Name of Submitter JOHN COATES # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 23.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Waihi and Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter objects to the prohibition of dogs on Black Hill in Waihi and Tauwhare Koiora Reserve in Kaiaua. His reasons will be provided at the Hearing of Submissions. The submitter's comments are noted. Decision Sought Decision sought not provided within submission. The proposed prohibition of dogs at Ngati Koi Domain only applies to the historic pa/urupā site at the summit of the hill in the Domain. The transitional gogovernance body for Ngati Koi Domain is also investigating the possibility of providing an exercise area at the Domain. The transitional go-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora has proposed to prohibit dogs from this site as there is a child's playground and also an urupā site located in this area.

251 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 12

252 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 13 Name of Submitter INGRID BROEKHALS # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 3.1 Dog Exercise The submitter's comments are noted. Areas Reason for Request The submitter believes that little value is received by dog owners from paying the dog registration fee and points out that cats and cat owners do not have the same restrictions. The submitter is concerned about the increase in restrictions on dogs and their owners, current dog exercise areas, use of the Hauraki Rail Trail as a dog exercise area, dog bag stations, and makes several suggestions for improvement in these matters. Decision Sought That the Council consider the following: 1. That when an area becomes prohibited for dog access that another area should be designated as a dog exercise area. 2. That the exercise area behind McDonalds in Paeroa is small and not stimulating for dogs and the Rotokohu road part of the cycle trail is boring, close to the road and heavily sprayed which may cause harm to dogs. 3. That a trial period for the dual use of the cycleway be allowed where dogs may be exercised during the low/quiet cycle periods. 4. That dog bag stations be introduced in dog exercise areas and that the use of recycled plastic grocery bags be allowed to deposit dog excrement in these bins. There are two dog exercise areas in Paeroa; the stop bank land in Paeroa between the Criterion bridge and William Street and Brenan Field, but excluding the skate park and the sports fields. This means the submitter may walk their dog off-leash behind McDonalds but also further along the stop bank. Dogs are not permitted off-leash on the Hauraki Rail Trail but may be walked on leash at certain locations. The prohibition of dogs on rural sections of the Hauraki Rail Trail is in place because of farmers concerns about dogs on the Trail and is also a condition of the resource consent granted to build the Hauraki Rail Trail. A report was presented to the Ward Committees in April about providing 'doggy-doo' bins at dog exercise areas. Staff recommend that bins are provided at dog exercise areas in the District.

253 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 14 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Ingrid Broekhals OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 23, Kennedy Street, PAEROA 3600 Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: ingridbroekhals@gmail.com A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I think there are some very solid reasons for making changes to the Dog Control Policy/ bylaw. It is important to consider environmental impact of the recreational needs for dogs. However, it has become apparent that there are ever increasing restrictions for dogs and their owners. If there is a change to accessing a certain area for dogs then it is extremely important to provide another exercise area for dogs in the same vicinity. We as responsible dog owners pay a registration fee and get little in return. Cat owners don't have to register their pet and the cat gets to roam and poo anywhere it likes. I find the exerise area behind MacDonalds in Paeroa very unstimulating and way too small. The allocated section of the rail trail along Rotokohu Rd is boring and very close to the road and both areas are heavily sprayed so we expose our dog to spray residue which is absorbed through the paw pads, every time we exercise the dog. I would like to see a 'wild' area allocated for off lead dog exercise. Cyclists, who pay no fees or registration, have had a fortune of public money spent on them with the cycle trail and there are chunks of time when the trail is unused. Dogs are not allowed on the trail, for the better part. I advocate that there be dual use of the cycle trail be trialled, with the proviso of use by dog owners at low cycle use times and the pick up of excrement. Thames D.C. provide dog bag stations to assist excrement pick up. H.D.C. could do the same for very little cost by accepting the collection of plastic grocery bags as part of the recycling pickup, for this purpose. Thank you for reading this Ingrid Broekhals If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Wed, 13 Apr 16 10:11:39 1/1

254 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 15 Name of Submitter DENNIS MOLLER and PAULINE MOLLER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 15.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino - Victoria Battery Reason for Request The submitters oppose the proposal to create an off-leash dog exercise area in the vicinity of Waikino Domain, at a cost to Council and ratepayers when dog owners can and already use the Victoria Battery site as an off-leash area. The submission includes an sent to Warren Geraghty, Department of Conservation (DOC) that outlines the submitters opinion on the Victoria Battery s site flora and fauna, how the locals have contributed to the maintenance of the site and that many local dog owners currently use the site as an off-leash area for their dogs. The Submitters request that Council and DOC organise another public meeting with local dog owners at the Victoria Hall, to further discuss the Waikino dog exercise areas and the possibility that DOC could relax their on-lead policy at the Victoria Battery site and allow dogs to be exercise off-leash between the hours of 4pm and 9am. Decision Sought That Council and DOC organise another public meeting at the Victoria Hall as soon as possible with Waikino dog owners, to further discuss the issue of the dog exercise area at the Victoria Battery site. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. While the Council can legally enforce dog control at the Victoria Battery because it is a public place, the land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department Dog control general Dog Control Complaints Reason for Request The submitter requests that Council make publicly available at the Hearing of Submissions the nature of the complaints received on the control of dogs at the Victoria Battery site. Decision Sought That Council make publicly available at the Hearing of Submissions the nature of the complaints received on the control of dogs at the Victoria Battery site. The Council's dog control officers undertake patrols of the District at various times and are aware that people are allowing their dogs off-leash at the Victoria Battery site and off-leash on road reserve in the Waikino and wider Karangahake Gorge area. This has also been confirmed by submitters to this submission process. In the past year there has been one incident at the Victoria Battery site where the Council's dog control officers attended a 'dog attacks dog' incident. One dog was on-leash and the other was off-leash. The off-leash dog attacked the dog that was on-leash. Prior to this there were several complaints about a dog roaming free at the site.

255 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 16 From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Dennis and Pauline Moller Saturday, April 16, :23 AM info Submission regarding dog control area at Waikino Dogs off leash at The Battery._._ Waikino_.eml To whom it may concern, To save repeating ourselves, this is the which we have sent to DOC rep. Warren Geraghty. This explains our feelings regarding the ridiculous idea of a new ( and costly ) off leash area for dogs in Waikino. There is already, adequate existing parking and the land area at the Battery is perfect. Why not change some rules and keep everyone happy, at no extra cost to council and ratepayers? Please can we have another public meeting at the Victoria Hall, as soon as possible, but this time, with a DOC rep. also present? Regards Dennis and Pauline Moller 42 Poland St Waikino 1

256 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 17 From: Sent: To: Subject: Dennis and Pauline Moller Saturday, April 16, :57 AM Warren Geraghty Dogs off leash at The Battery... Waikino. Hi Warren The Hauraki District Council recently held a meeting with Waikino dog owners, with an idea of setting up a designated off leash dog exercise area in our village. Most of us who attended the meeting were NOT happy with the pathetic small area on offer, the close vicinity to residential properties, and the parking problems involved. Of course the Council also reminded us that the ratepayers would be paying for this set up, and for the ongoing maintenance. Lacking footpaths in our village, means that we have no safe place to walk our dogs except on the road itself, or at The Battery. There is a large group of responsible dog owners who enjoy walking their dogs at The Battery. I understand DOC rules about dogs being ON the leash when there are unique plants and protected wildlife to consider. However, as you well know, there are no unique plants except for blackberry, gorse and established trees.the only wildlife on the Battery are rabbits, stoats and rats Why is it then, that dogs on The Battery site have to be on the leash at ALL times? I am aware that the lack of maintenance at the Battery is due to the fact that DOC is short of funds. Over the years a few of us keen dog walkers have taken it into our own hands to trim back foliage, sweep the tunnel, unblock drains and pick up rubbish and broken bottles. We have also brought DOC s attention to any problems in that area. We are willing to form a group called Friends of The Battery and regularly gather together to help keep the Battery maintained. With that in mind, would DOC then consider changing the hard and fast rule of keeping dogs on the leash at ALL times, and relax the rule to give permission for dogs to have specific OFF leash times perhaps before 9am. and after 4pm.? It is not easy for some of us older folk to walk energetic dogs on a leash, especially when they smell the scent of a rabbit, and almost pull our arms out of their sockets...! Our daily Battery dog walks are always good for the body and soul, and many friendships have been formed over the years. If DOC is not willing to change the rules, then no doubt, our walks will be few and far between and our interest in helping to maintain The Battery will NOT exist. We would like a DOC rep. and an HDC. rep. to join with the local dog owners one evening in our local Victoria Hall, to have further discussions about this whole issue as soon as possible. Regards Dennis and Pauline Moller Ph or

257 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 18

258 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 19 Name of Submitter DEREK HARDY # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 25.1 Dog control The submitter's comments are noted. in public places Reason for Request The submitter is discontent with the policy s requirement that all dogs must be kept on a leash at all times in any public place and believes this rule is too rigid and that the potential costly infringements, which are at the discretion of the Dog Ranger is subjective, depends on the Ranger s mood and his relationship with the offender and has the potential to cause ill-feeling between dog owners and Council. The submitter believes that the restrictions imposed on dog owners is inconsistent with the policies objectives in enabling people to enjoy the benefits of dog ownership by providing for the exercise and recreational needs of dogs and their owners, and that it does not align with the Council s Lifestyle Hauraki community outcome. The dog on-leash in all public places policy (unless the site is a dog exercise area) has been in place since the Council first developed a dog control policy in It is seen as the safest way to ensure dogs are under control in the community and cannot cause public harm or nuisance in places such as town centres, residential areas and reserves where children and families often frequent Dog Exercise Areas Waihi and Waikino Decision Sought Decision sought not provided within submission. Reason for Request The submitter finds the dog exercise areas indicated in the proposal to be inflexible, marginal in size and provides the following comments on these areas: Waikino s proposed new site is too small. Morgan Park site becomes waterlogged after light rain. Consols Street site has inadequate fencing and turf becomes damaged by vehicle use. Waikino Victoria Battery site is an example of a preferred off-leash area that allows the safe socialisation of dogs and their owners. The submitter is in discussion with a colleague in the Department of Conservation in respect of possible negotiations with a view to conditions being amended to allow some use of the site for dog exercise. The submitter's comments are noted. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog on-leash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. A report was presented to the Ward Committees in April about providing 'doggydoo' bins at all dog exercise areas. Staff recommend that bins are provided at all dog exercise areas in the District. Decision Sought That the off-leash dog exercise areas provided for in Waihi and Waikino should be suitably large in size, have adequate fencing, signage and a waste bin for bagged dog faeces. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

259 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 20 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Derek Hardy OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Draft Dog Control Policy 5.1 I am unhappy with the continuation of the absolute requirement for all dogs to be on a leash at all times in any public place. Whilst this aligns with the policy of the Waikato and Thames-Coromandel Districts, there is no room for the flexibility allowed by the Tauranga City and the Western Bay of Plenty and Matamata-Piako Districts. Given the size of potential fines, this rigid attitude immediately makes for ill feeling between dog owners and Council in an atmosphere of confrontation rather than cooperation. A Dog Ranger might have some discretion in issuing an infringement notice, but this would be entirely subjective and depend on such variables as the Ranger's mood at the time, and his relationship with the 'offender'. 5.5 The inflexible approach leads inevitably to such inadequate concessions as the proposed allocation of tiny sliver of land at Waikino as on off leash exercise area. This is likely to be totally ignored by almost all local dog owners. The existing off leash exercise areas are marginal at best. The area at Morgan Park becomes waterlogged after even light rain; hardly encouraging to anyone, as it remains boggy for days after rain. The area in Consols Street is unfenced on two sides; there is no fence between it and the community marae or on the long side next to the road. Fencing is inadequate at the eastern end.the turf has been damaged by a vehicle. I have yet to pass by this area at a time when it is in use for dog exercise, though it is a useful car park for big functions at the marae. Adequate fencing, signage and a waste bin for bagged faeces might encourage more use. 4.1 and 3.1 iii) Given my previous comments, it will be understood that these sections do not impress me. The overall impression that I am given is that the council regards dog owners as a group to be discouraged and rigidly controlled. The use of the Victoria Battery site as a de facto off leash exercise area is a side issue. I have walked dogs there for around twenty years with only one serious incident (when my dog was attacked by four known dangerous dogs in the care of a single person). The Battery site has been for many a place to socialise with other owners, and for the safe socialising of their dogs. This atmosphere is what an off leash exercise area should be. At this stage I am awaiting a reply to a friend, from the Department of Conservation in respect of possible negotiations with a view to conditions being amended to allow some use of the Battery for exercise. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Sun, 24 Apr 16 13:49:22 1/1

260 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 21 Name of Submitter FRANK GAUSDEN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 34.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter requests further clarification as to the type of bones discovered in the ground disturbances located near the Kaiaua boat club, as detected by the geomagnetic survey. The submitter suggests if human bones were present in the pits then the area should be properly fenced off from public access. Otherwise if the ground disturbances are from old drainage soakaways or rubbish pits, then the submitter suggests that dogs should not be banned from that area. Decision Sought That Council further investigate the ground disturbances in the area near the Kaiaua boat club, as detected by the geomagnetic survey, to determine the type of bones in the pits before Council declares a total ban of dogs being exercised in this area. The submitter's request for further information is noted. The Kaiaua boat ramp area is significant to Ngāti Paoa as it contains an urupā (burial ground). The location of the urupā was confirmed in July 2014 by an archaeological geomagnetic survey. The koiwi (human bones) burial pits are located at the main entrance to the site within the Council-owned unformed legal road. As part of the Treaty Settlement process this area will be vested in Ngāti Paoa, gazetted as reserve land and administered by a single joint management body consisting of councillors of the Hauraki District Council and representatives from Ngāti Paoa.

261 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 22 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 frank gausden OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Hello, My concern is in regard to the proposed banning of dogs from the area around the boat club, Kaiaua. I m not certain that a geomagnetic survey alone can confirm the presence of a bone pit, although it can confirm the presence of a past disturbance of the ground. I thought I had read somewhere recently in a HDC document that the survey disclosed possible bone pits at the locations indicated on your map. Please check that matter, because I cannot now find that document on your website. I believe that a further investigation should be undertaken to confirm that the ground disturbances detected by the geomagnetic survey are human bone pits -- or not -- as the case may be. If they are shown to be human bone pits they should be fenced off properly to give proper respect to those buried there, not left open for people to park their boat trailers and cars over them, or chuck their cigarette ends, etc., down on them. On the other hand, if the disturbances are shown to be old drainage soakaways or rubbish pits, then dogs should not be banned from that area, as to do so would be yielding to shallow empire-building tactics by those wishing to exercise control of the area concerned for their own self interest. Regards, Frank Gausden If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Sat, 30 Apr 16 23:35:15 1/1

262 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 23 Name of Submitter BRIAN HABBERFIELD # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 26.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter presently chairs the Waikino Domain Board and lives opposite the area proposed for a dog exercise area immediately adjacent to the Waikino Recreation Reserve. The submitter provides an overview of his understanding of the proposed new dog exercise area near the reserve in comparison with the de-facto dog exercise at the Victoria Battery site which is regularly used. He personally does not object to the proposal or improving the reserves facilities to make it suitable for dogs, but suggests that the project may become a 'white elephant' as dog owners would prefer to keep using the Victoria Battery site as it is a far superior option for exercising dogs and any conflicts of interest could be managed. Decision Sought That Council should investigate the possibility of negotiating with the Department of Conservation about a restricted dog exercise area at the Victoria Battery site to be available in the early morning and late afternoon. Council staff thank Mr Habberfield for all the input he has had on the dog exercise area proposal to date in his role as the Chair of the Waikino Domain Board. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

263 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 24 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Brian Habberfield OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 43 Waitekauri Rd. Waikino Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: brianhabberfield@gmail.com A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Dog Exercise Area proposed for Waikino adjacent to Waikino Recreation Reserve. Declaration of interest; My name is Brian Habberfield, and I have lived in Waikino since 1981, a period of 35 years. During that time, I have owned a number of dogs, but now do not. I live across the road from the Waikino Recreation Reserve, directly opposite the area proposed for a dog exercise area. I presently chair the Waikino Domain Board, which is a subcommittee of HDC and helps administer the reserve. I have no personal objection to the creation of a dog exercise area on the site proposed immediately adjacent to the Waikino Recreation Reserve and it s main entrance, and am happy to see any improvements in facilities, fencing, and maintenance of the reserve, and any increase in utilisation of that asset for it s nominative purpose, recreation. This is my understanding of the present situation, and my views on policy change proposals regarding demand/need, suitability for purpose, possible public uptake, and feasible alternate solutions. Waikino dog owners have been using the Victoria Battery site for off leash exercise of their dogs for more than 20 years that I am personally aware of. This happens mostly in the early morning or the evening. Over time the site has become more developed with the creation of the tramline and museum, and the Hauraki Railtrail, and now hosts a lot more recreational users. It has been pointed out that off leash exercise of dogs on this area contravenes existing dog control bylaws, and DOC policy, and that due to conflict of use and some reported incidents, this practice is about to be actively discouraged. I haven t accessed information on the number of reported incidents, or their nature and severity. I understand DOC s policy allows dogs on the Battery site and that section of the Railtrail on leash. To meet animal welfare requirements, Council must provide at least some designated areas for off leash exercise of dogs, so must be able to offer an alternative site when this discouragement begins. They say they have had a number of requests from locals for this. I do not know how many requests have been recorded, or the specifics of those requests. The proposal; The site proposed would have a triangular area of about 3000 m2, approximately 50m wide at the entrance end, 10m wide at the other end, and be about 100 metres long. 3/4 of an acre. It already has some trees in it, and would be fenced and mown. Some parking and a bin for bagged droppings would be provided, and there was a suggestion of some dog specific equipment being a possiblity if requested. The Battery site being used at present as a de facto dog exercise area is about 15 acres in total. The area mainly used, the largely grassed area at the Waikino Railway Station and SH1 underpass end, is about 5 acres, with some slopes and flats. There are plantings of trees and shrubs, toilets, pathways, and remnant structures. There are also rabbits. It is tractor mowed periodically. My conclusion. If a designated dog exercise area is established at the Waikino Recreation Reserve as proposed, it would be very much inferior to the de facto area currently being used at the Battery site, both in size and interest factor for dogs and their owners. I believe most people will continue to use the Battery site, perhaps restricting themselves more to early morning and evenings to avoid any intervention from HDC or DOC officials. A few people might use the Recreation Reserve site, but realistically it will not be many, and it wo If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 15 Apr 16 13:39:56 1/1

264 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 25 Dog Exercise Area proposed for Waikino adjacent to Waikino Recreation Reserve. Declaration of interest; My name is Brian Habberfield, and I have lived in Waikino since 1981, a period of 35 years. During that time, I have owned a number of dogs, but now do not. I live across the road from the Waikino Recreation Reserve, directly opposite the area proposed for a dog exercise area. I presently chair the Waikino Domain Board, which is a subcommittee of HDC and helps administer the reserve. I have no personal objection to the creation of a dog exercise area on the site proposed immediately adjacent to the Waikino Recreation Reserve and it s main entrance, and am happy to see any improvements in facilities, fencing, and maintenance of the reserve, and any increase in utilisation of that asset for it s nominative purpose, recreation. This is my understanding of the present situation, and my views on policy change proposals regarding demand/need, suitability for purpose, possible public uptake, and feasible alternate solutions. Waikino dog owners have been using the Victoria Battery site for off leash exercise of their dogs for more than 20 years that I am personally aware of. This happens mostly in the early morning or the evening. Over time the site has become more developed with the creation of the tramline and museum, and the Hauraki Railtrail, and now hosts a lot more recreational users. It has been pointed out that off leash exercise of dogs on this area contravenes existing dog control bylaws, and DOC policy, and that due to conflict of use and some reported incidents, this practice is about to be actively discouraged. I haven t accessed information on the number of reported incidents, or their nature and severity. I understand DOC s policy allows dogs on the Battery site and that section of the Railtrail on leash. To meet animal welfare requirements, Council must provide at least some designated areas for off leash exercise of dogs, so must be able to offer an alternative site when this discouragement begins. They say they have had a number of requests from locals for this. I do not know how many requests have been recorded, or the specifics of those requests. The proposal; The site proposed would have a triangular area of about 3000 m2, approximately 50m wide at the entrance end, 10m wide at the other end, and be about 100 metres long. 3/4 of an acre. It already has some trees in it, and would be fenced and mown. Some parking and a bin for bagged droppings would be provided, and there was a suggestion of some dog specific equipment being a possiblity if requested.

265 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 26 The Battery site being used at present as a de facto dog exercise area is about 15 acres in total. The area mainly used, the largely grassed area at the Waikino Railway Station and SH1 underpass end, is about 5 acres, with some slopes and flats. There are plantings of trees and shrubs, toilets, pathways, and remnant structures. There are also rabbits. It is tractor mowed periodically. My conclusion. If a designated dog exercise area is established at the Waikino Recreation Reserve as proposed, it would be very much inferior to the de facto area currently being used at the Battery site, both in size and interest factor for dogs and their owners. I believe most people will continue to use the Battery site, perhaps restricting themselves more to early morning and evenings to avoid any intervention from HDC or DOC officials. A few people might use the Recreation Reserve site, but realistically it will not be many, and it won t be everyone in the area exercising their dogs off leash. I think Council should investigate the possibility of negotiating with DOC a time restricted dog exercising access to the Battery site, given that early morning and later afternoon times see almost no other users on the Railtrail or Battery site, and incidents around conflicting use would rarely if ever occur. There are other provisions in the dog control bylaws that could apply if they were to. The monitoring and maintenance that would otherwise be used for the proposed site at the Waikino Recreation Reserve could be applied to the Battery site, helping DOC and the Railtrail Trust in a small way at the same time. That is my considered view, and I will reiterate, although I live opposite the proposed area, I would have no objection personally to it being created, but from my understanding of the history of the village and the choices people make, I can only anticipate that the proposal will be a bit of a white elephant, while a negotiated proposal utilising existing assets would provide a far superior option for dog exercise and any conflicts of interest could be managed.

266 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 27 Written Submissions (not speaking) Name of Submitter GARY DAVIDSON # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 1.1 Dog Exercise Areas Whiritoa Beach southern end Reason for Request The submitter disagrees with the proposal and finds the complete prohibition of dogs being exercised on the southern end of the Whiritoa beach as being overzealous. Decision Sought That Council reconsider the proposal and allow dogs to be exercised on-leash on the southern end of the Whiritoa Beach. The Department of Conservation has requested that dogs are banned from the southern end of Whiritoa beach to better protect dotterels for two main reasons: There have been direct dog attacks on dotterels and eggs in the past. It is an issue if dogs are in too close proximity to nests because the dotterel parents will undertake distraction displays to lead intruders (dogs) away from the eggs/chicks. This means if there are constant threats to the birds they might be off their nests for long periods of time which can lead the eggs to overheat/cool depending on the weather conditions, making the eggs unviable. If the parents have chicks they will get them to run into the dunes and hide. Prolonged amounts of time hiding can cause the chicks to feed less and grow slower, meaning more time on the ground before they can fly, where they are more susceptible to predators. While dogs being on a leash might stop direct dog attacks on dotterels and their eggs it is unlikely to stop dotterels undertaking distraction displays. The proposal to prohibit dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa beach is supported by Maori land owners who own private land at the southern end of the beach in a Trust. The Trust does not support dogs being permitted at the southern end of the beach whether on a leash or not.

267 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 28 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Gary Davidson OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: As a resident and bird lover of Whiritoa Beach I find the complete prohibition of dogs from the southern end of the beach overzealous and unnecessary. I agree with dogs being on a leash in this area for the protection of the birds but complete prohibition is going too far. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Sat, 09 Apr 16 11:34:23 1/1

268 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 29 Name of Submitter LYNN GREEN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 2.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach southern end Reason for Request The submitter disagrees with the proposal s complete prohibition of dogs being exercised on the southern end of the Whiritoa beach for the protection of nesting dotterels, as it is not possible to provide a safe environment for the dotterels as they will naturally nest where ever they please including other areas on the beach and by the helipad. The submitter suggests Council should direct their attention towards a controlled breeding programme. Decision Sought That Council reconsider the proposal and allow dogs to be exercised on-leash at southern end of the Whiritoa Beach, and that Council redirect their attention towards a controlled breeding programme. In 1995 the Department of Conservation established a dotterel monitoring and breeding programme for the Coromandel Peninsula and since the season of 1998/1999 Whiritoa beach has been recognised as a breeding site. Dotterel numbers have been recovering across the Coromandel since the breeding programme was established. Whiritoa beach now has six resident pairs of Dotterels (there are sometimes seven recorded) which return to the same location to nest every year. Five of these pairs regularly nest at the southern end of Whiritoa Beach while one other resident pair usually nests 200m either side of the surf club. Another pair sometimes nests at the northern end of the beach. While the Department of Conservation initially asked the Council to ban dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach and other areas where dotterels have also been known to nest, the Council agreed to limit the prohibition to the southern end of the beach which is recognised as the main breeding site. The Secretary of the Whangamata Trust, which owns a large part of the foreshore at the southern end of the beach as private land, does not support dogs being permitted at the southern end of the beach whether on a leash or not.

269 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 30 From: Sent: To: Subject: Lynn Sunday, April 10, :21 PM info RDN# Prohibition of dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach To who it may concern I would like to lodge my opposition to your proposal. I am a resident of Whiritoa for the past 5 yrs and a responsible dog owner. I strongly oppose your plans to prohibit dogs from the southern end of the beach. You have given the reason for this, as Dotterel preservation as they nest in this area. I would like to advise you that this is not the only area that the birds nest as I am sure you are already aware. They nest sporadically the length of the beach and this past season there were a pair breeding up on the reserve by the Heli Pad. Now honestly are you going to prevent the helicopter from landing there because there are birds there I think not. These birds are going to nest where they will and you cannot provide a safe environment in the natural because unfortunately the birds will not understand they are not to nest elsewhere just the southern end of the beach. Your time and effort would be better spent in a controlled breeding programme. Lynn Green This has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. 1

270 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 31 Name of Submitter BARRY AND JANICE CHRISTIANSEN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 4.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach Reason for Request The submitters agree with the proposal s complete prohibition of dogs being exercised on the southern end of the Whiritoa beach for the protection of nesting dotterels, and requests clarification around some of the dog restrictions outlined in the proposal. The submitters is concerned about the disturbance to the dotterels nesting areas along the beach from the intrusion of quad bikes, humans and dogs and would like to see that the Council enforce the rules within the policy and bylaw. The submitters make several suggestions towards amending the dog control policy and bylaw and implementing these measures towards eliminating the intrusion on the dotterels nesting areas. Decision Sought That Council consider the following suggestions to protect the nesting dotterels at Whiritoa Beach and make the necessary amendments to the dog control policy and bylaw: 1. That dogs be prohibited from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach from the 1 August, the beginning of the dotterels breeding season, and that the rest of the Whiritoa Beach have a dog restriction enforced from 1 October to 1 March between the hours of 9am to 7pm. 2. That the Maori Land owners and their dogs that live at the southern end of the beach fully support and abide by the dog prohibition/restrictions. 3. That the ban should also apply to humans and quad bikes on the beach at the southern end and allow the Department of Conservation to fence off the dotterels breeding area but leave a 2-3 metre wide access path to the surf. 4. That visible signage is installed at the end of Kon Tiki Road and in several other locations along the beach clearly indicating the restricted or prohibited areas for the southern end of the beach. The submitter's support and recommendations are noted. While the Department of Conservation initially asked the Council to ban dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach and other areas where dotterels have also been known to nest, the Council agreed to limit the prohibition to the southern end of the beach which is recognised as the main breeding site with five pairs of dotterels regularly nesting there. The Council did not believe implementing a dog prohibition at other areas along the beach was practical. The Council could investigate banning quad bikes from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach when it reviews Part 3: Public Safety of the Consolidated Bylaw. The Department of Conservation is in charge of monitoring the dotterel nests and will continue to advise the public of the location of the nests. Staff recommend that the Council put signage in place once the dog control policy is adopted to ensure people are aware of any sites that are prohibited to dogs.

271 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 32 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Barry and Janice Christiansen OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 1 Pukeko Way Whiritoa Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: bjandco@woosh.co.nz A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: We write in full support of the proposal to prohibit dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach from south of the beach access off Moray Place. We wish to raise the following points: 1) Is it intended to prohibit dogs from this area for 365 days a year, as this isn't clear to us in the proposal? If this is not the case, then the prohibition of dogs from this southern area of the beach must start from the 1st of August as this is when dotterels commence nest building for the breeding season. 2) We note that the proposal is "supported by Maori Land owners who hold private land at the southern end of the beach in a trust". It is critical that they do support this initiative. Our only concern is that they support this initiative in practice, as this summer we have noted dogs with no collars identified as belonging to the only house on the Maori owned land at the southern end, roaming freely on the beach dune area where the dotterels nest. 3) Ideally, to ensure successful dotterel breeding at Whiritoa, humans also need excluding from the southern area as a main cause of a poor breeding season is dotterels continually leaving the nest to deal with any perceived threat. Clearly this wouldn't be acceptable to the majority, but there are some key steps which can be taken to mitigate any dotterel disturbance by humans. Firstly, the ban on dogs at the southern end also needs to extend to four wheeler motorbikes. I understand the current 'rules' are that motorbikes can only be taken on the beach to launch boats, however, it seems to have become practice to use them for any purpose. Therefore the Council needs to ensure its own rules are enforced. Secondly, DOC should be given the right to fence off all the sand area at the southern end from disturbance, human or otherwise, except for a 2-3 metre wide access path to the surf. 4) If this initiative is adopted there needs to be very good signage at the end of Kon Tiki Road to ensure the message is 100% clear, and there is no ambiguity between this 'special' area of the beach and the rules which apply to the rest of the beach. 5) In addition to the above, to ensure people walking along the beach from the north (Surf Club) towards the southern end are fully aware it is a "no dog" area, there also needs to be very visible signage which is fully in view even if someone is walking at low tide by the water's edge. 6) Although most dotterels do nest at the southern end of the beach, there has been successful chick raising this last breeding season, close to the surf club. To protect these nesting dotterels who are nesting outside the southern end, we would like to see the 1st of December date for dogs being off beach during 9.00am and 7.00pm put back to the 1st of October at least. If this is not possible then we need to ensure current rules over dogs being prohibited from the beach between these hours from 20th of December to 1st of March are properly policed. Regards, Barry and Janice Christiansen. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Wed, 06 Apr 16 11:38:22 1/1

272 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 33 Name of Submitter KATHLEEN DIGGINS # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 5.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter is a member of the NZ Motor Caravan Association and frequently camps at the reserve near Kaiaua Boat Club with her dog and abides by the dog control bylaws. She believes that loosing the ability to camp at the reserve with her dog would be of a personal hardship and it would deter other campers with dogs from visiting Kaiaua and supporting the local businesses. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council staff investigate an alternative location suitable for freedom camping, where dogs are also permitted, at a location north of Tuwhare Koiora Reserve. Council staff also recommend that the Council support the decision of the transitional co-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and prohibit dogs from this area.

273 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 34 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Kathleen Diggins OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Banning of dogs on leash and under owner's control from Kaiaua Boat Club Reserve. I have visited the Boat Club Reserve many times accompanied by my dog Cara, other campers also have their dogs and everyone gets on very well (people and dogs), I have not seen any problems caused by dogs at the Reserve. I am a member of the New Zealand Motor Caravan Association and abide by their standard of expected behaviour. To lose such a facility would be a personal hardship - and a loss of spending for Kaiaua, as when I visit, I use the Hotel Bar and Restaurant, the Fish & Chip shop, local dairy and petrol station, and I struggle to understand why Kaiaua would want to deprive itself of my and other dog owning camper's spending power. I also sing the praises of the area - Hot Pools, bird watching, beautiful scenery and of course friendly locals. I enjoy camping with my dog, and I follow all the bylaws - my dog is under my control, is picked up after and doesn't annoy anyone. I respectfully request that the current dog controls/policy are continued into the future. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 08 Apr 16 20:13:01 1/1

274 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 35 Name of Submitter KAREN HART # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 6.1 Seizing Reason for Request The submitter's support is noted. menacing and The submitter believes that owners of dangerous menacing and dangerous dogs have shown dogs that they are unreliable and unlikely to comply with the Dog Control Act. The submitter does not believe it will reduce costs to Council but does support the inclusion of section 8.5 and 9.3 in the Dog Control Policy where dog control officers may seize menacing and dangerous dogs from their owners if they have not complied with the Dog Control Act. Decision Sought That Council adopt the inclusion of the statement in the Policy (section 8.5 and 9.3) that authorises dog control officers to seize menacing and dangerous dogs from their owners if they have not complied with the Dog Control Act.

275 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 36

276 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 37 Name of Submitter CORALIE JOYCE # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 7.1 Prohibited Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach Southern End Reason for Request The submitter has concerns that the proposed dog ban at the southern end of Whiritoa beach would mean that dog owners would not be able to walk their canines on the blowhole walk or let their dog swim in this area and also questions the time frame of the proposed ban. Decision Sought That Council consider allowing dogs to be exercised on-leash from the Moray Place beach access point southwards along Whiritoa Beach. The Department of Conservation has requested that dogs are banned from the southern end of Whiritoa beach to better protect dotterels for two main reasons: There have been direct dog attacks on dotterels and eggs in the past. It is an issue if dogs are in too close a proximity to nests because the dotterel parents will undertake distraction displays to lead intruders (dogs) away from the eggs/chicks. This means if there are constant threats to the birds they might be off their nests for long periods of time which can lead the eggs to overheat/cool depending on the weather conditions, making the eggs unviable. If the parents have chicks they will get them to run into the dunes and hide. Prolonged amounts of time hiding can cause the chicks to feed less and grow slower, meaning more time on the ground before they can fly, where they are more susceptible to predators. While dogs being on a leash might stop direct dog attacks on dotterels and their eggs it is unlikely to stop dotterels undertaking distraction displays. The Whangamata Trust, which owns a large part of the foreshore at the southern end of the beach as private land in that Trust, does not support dogs being permitted at the southern end of the beach whether on a leash or not.

277 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 38 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Coralie Joyce OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: We have a Bach at Whiritoa. If a dog ban is put on the southern end of the beach, it would mean that dog owners could no longer take theirs dogs on the blowhole walk or let their dogs swim. Could you maybe consider that at all times from Moray Place beach access southwards dogs have to be on a short lead ( not extended) unless at the waters edge or on the track. Also what time frame would it be? The whole year or just over the Dotterel breeding season? If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 01 Apr 16 21:31:54 1/1

278 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 39 Name of Submitter PAMELA MCLEAN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 8.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The Submitter disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and states that she has never seen any problems with dogs at the reserve. The submitter frequently stays at the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve in Kaiaua in a self-contained motorhome with her dog and supports the local businesses. They are unable to camp at Rays Rest Reserve because of the No Dog Policy. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council staff investigate an alternative location suitable for freedom camping, where dogs are also permitted, at a location north of Tuwhare Koiora Reserve. Council staff also recommend that the Council support the decision of the transitional co-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and prohibit dogs from this area.

279 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 40 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Pamela McLean OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 313 Woodland Rd Katikati Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: pjmclean313@gmail.com A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I would be very disappointed if you will not let dogs at the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve near the Kaiaua Boating Club. We often stay there in our selfcontained motorhome with our dog. Who by the way is very valuable breed and is always on a lead. We are not able to stay at Rays Rest because of the No Dog Policy there. We go up that way specialy to stay there and bring business with us eg, diesel at the garage, meal at pub or fish and chips etc. The local business depend on the passing travellers and I find it very short sighted of the council to ban dogs from this site. I have stayed there many times over the years and have never seen a problem ever with any dogs. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 07 Apr 16 16:45:48 1/1

280 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 41 Name of Submitter JOHN MUNRO # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 9.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve as this would leave no where for anyone with a dog to visit the area. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve, Kaiaua. It is not a dog exercise area so dogs should not be off-leash. Currently dogs are permitted off-leash on all public land between the northern boundary of the District at Waharau (north of Kaiaua) and the southern boundary of the Wharekawa Recreation Reserve, which is defined by the Waihopuhopu Bridge.

281 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 42 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 John Munro OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I do not support the the no dog policy at the Kaiaua reserve as there is no dogs allowed at Rays Rest. This would exclude anyone with a dog visiting the area John Munro If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 08 Apr 16 18:25:26 1/1

282 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 43 Name of Submitter DIANNA STALLINGER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 10.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. The submitter frequently stays at the Reserve in a motorhome with her dog which is never left to run free and the submitter supports the local businesses. The submitter believes a well controlled dog on a leash does not cause any problems. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council staff investigate an alternative location suitable for freedom camping, where dogs are also permitted, at a location north of Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Council staff also recommend that the Council support the decision of the transitional co-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and prohibit dogs from this area.

283 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 44 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Dianna Stallinger OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I fully understand and respect the face that dogs are not allowed on the shell bank due to the birds. It does, however seem unnecessarily harsh to not permit dogs on a leash to be near the boating club. I travel in a Motorhome with a little toy poodle. We always spend a night at the boating club so I can enjoy either the fish and chips as a takeaway or a meal in the hotel. My dog is never running free and does no harm. I not only pick up after her I also pick up any rubbish left by anybody wherever I park. A well controlled dog on a leash does not cause any problem by the boating club. It is unnecessary and unfair to make a ruling forbidding people to stay there with a dog. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 07 Apr 16 19:00:11 1/1

284 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 45 Name of Submitter MONICA VAN OOSTROM # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 11.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Various locations in Hauraki Reason for Request The submitter believes that dogs exercised on-leash, whose owners pick up their dogs faeces, are not a nuisance or threat to people, property, birdlife etc and disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from Tauwhare Koiora Reserve, Ngati Koi Domain and the southern end of Whiritoa Beach. Decision Sought That Council permit dogs to be exercised on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve, Ngati Koi Domain and the southern end of Whiritoa Beach. While dogs being on a leash might stop direct dog attacks on dotterels and their eggs it is unlikely to stop dotterels undertaking distraction displays where the adults and chicks hide in the dunes compromising the eggs or chicks viability. It is proposed that dogs be prohibited from the historic pa/urupā site at the summit of the hill in Ngati Koi Domain, Waihi, not the entire Domain. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council proceed with the dog prohibitions at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve, the pa site at the top of the hill in Ngati Koi Domain, and the southern end of Whiritoa Beach.

285 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 46 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Monica van Oostrom OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Prohibition of dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach Currently dogs are allowed off leash at certain times of the day along the entire length of Whiritoa beach. The Department of Conservation has asked the Council to change this policy and to prohibit dogs from the southern end of Whiritoa Beach, which is defined as being south of the beach access off Moray Place. The reason for this is to better protect the dotterels that nest there every year. - Submit that dogs not be prohibited, but the bylaw amended so that dogs are permitted on leash at this location. Dog Control at Ngati Koi Domain (Black Hill Reserve), Waihi Currently dogs are permitted on leash at Ngati Koi Domain, Waihi. - Submit that dogs continue to be permitted on leash at this location. Dog Control at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve (Swing Bridge Reserve), Kaiaua Currently dogs are permitted on leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve, which is located in the vicinity of the Kaiaua Boating Club on East Coast Road, Kaiaua. - Submit that dogs continue to be permitted on leash at this location. General comment: On-leash dogs, (whose owners pick up droppings) are not a nuisance or threat to people, property, birdlife etc. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 08 Apr 16 13:47:34 1/1

286 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 47 Name of Submitter ANDREW WESTGATE # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 12.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter stays at the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve in a motorhome with his dog and disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from the Reserve as it would leave nowhere else on the coastline for people to stay in a motorhome that have a dog. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council staff investigate an alternative location suitable for freedom camping, where dogs are also permitted, at a location north of Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Council staff also recommend that the Council support the decision of the transitional co-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and prohibit dogs from this area.

287 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 48 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Andrew Westgate OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 36 David Street, Morrinsville Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: andy.westgate@xtra.co.nz A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: As dogs are prohibited from Rays Rest and the A.R.C parks if the proposal to ban dogs from the Kaiaua Fishing club area goes ahead there will be no-where on that coast we are able to stay in our motorhome with our 4.5 kilo lap dog, therefore I strongly object to this proposal. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Sat, 09 Apr 16 09:29:28 1/1

288 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 49 Name of Submitter KAREN SALES # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 13.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Tauwhare Koiora (Swing Bridge) Reserve Kaiaua Reason for Request The submitter stays at the Tauwhare Koiora Reserve in a certified self contained motorhome with her dog and disagrees with Council s proposal to ban dogs from the Reserve. Decision Sought That Council keep the current dog control policy and bylaw enforced for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Currently dogs are permitted on-leash at Tauwhare Koiora Reserve Kaiaua. The land around the Kaiaua boat club is currently a mix of road reserve and Crown land. As part of the Treaty Settlement negotiations the area will soon be gazetted as a reserve. Once the area is a legal reserve it is likely that freedom camping will not be permitted on the land. It is recommended that Council staff investigate an alternative location suitable for freedom camping, where dogs are also permitted, at a location north of Tauwhare Koiora Reserve. Council staff also recommend that the Council support the decision of the transitional co-governance body for Tauwhare Koiora Reserve and prohibit dogs from this area.

289 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 50 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Karen Sales OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 1313 Horotiu Road Whatawhata Hamilton Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: karen_brian@yahoo.com.au A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: We own a Certified Self Contained Motorhome and also travel with our dog as most Motorhomer's We would like the HDC to consider allowing Dogs on Leases only on the Boat Ramp at Kaiaua If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 07 Apr 16 17:56:27 1/1

290 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 51 Name of Submitter ALISON ROOT # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 14.1 Dog Exercise The submitter's comments are noted. Areas Waihi Reason for Request The submitter states there is no off-leash secure area designated in Waihi for dogs to run and points out that the designated dog exercise area on Consol Street can t be used during an event, that there are no bins to place dog faeces in, it s not a fully fenced area and the properties adjacent to the area all have dogs residing in them. Decision Sought That Council provide a fully fenced secure area for dogs to be allowed to run offleash within Waihi and provide bins to place dog faeces in Seizing Reason for Request menacing and dangerous dogs The submitter looks after a dangerous dog which is muzzled and kept on a lead at all times. The submitter is frustrated with the number of unregistered and collarless dogs that are left free to roam and those dog owners that allow their unrestrained dogs to approach her and her dog. The submitter has been advised by Council that they can t do anything because these dogs haven t attacked her or her dog. The submitter believes it is easy for a menacing or dangerous dog to be let out of the pound. A report was presented to the Ward Committees in April about providing more 'doggy-doo' bins at dog exercise areas. Staff recommend that bins be installed at dog exercise areas in the District. The Council has never provided fully fenced dog exercise areas in the District because it believes it is the responsibility of the dog owner to ensure that their dog is under control at all times in public places, even if the dog is off-leash. The submitter's comments are noted. All dogs that are in a public place that is not designated as a dog exercise area must be on a leash. People can be given a fine if they are not complying with the Council s Dog Control Bylaw and have their dog off-leash where it is not permitted. Menacing dogs are not released from the pound until they are compliant with the requirements of the Dog Control Act and the Council's bylaw. If a dog is classified as a menacing dog and abandoned it will not be re-homed. Decision Sought Decision sought is not clear.

291 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 52

292 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 53 Name of Submitter KRYSTAL GLEN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 16.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino - Victoria Battery and Waikino Domain Reason for Request The submitter agrees to a proposed new off-leash dog exercise area near Waikino Domain being created but is concerned about the amount of use it would receive due to its small size. The submitter currently uses the Victoria Battery site as an off-leash dog exercise area, like most of the other local dog owners, during either the early morning, late evening, but not during long weekends or public holidays when the area becomes busy with visitors. Decision Sought That the new proposed dog exercise area near Waikino Domain progresses, but on a larger scale, and that an off-leash dog policy be introduced at Waikino s Victoria Battery site within restricted hours (i.e. 5pm to 9am), that would exclude the actual Rail Trail and 10 metres either side of it. The submitter's support for a dog exercise area in Waikino is noted. It is also noted that the submitter thinks the proposed exercise area needs to be larger. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

293 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 54 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Krystal Glen OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Address: 66 Old Waitekauri Road Waikino Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: pennellkrystal@gmail.com A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: My name is Krystal Glen. My husband and I have two dogs, one of which is a very high energy dog (a Hungarian Vizsla), who requires 2 hours of walking daily. On-leash walking does not provide the exercise that this dog needs for his health and mental well-being. This means at present, technically to walk our dog off leash - we would need to drive to Waihi Beach twice daily to find an area suitable in size to adequately exercise him. We, as many other locals, choose to use the Victoria Battery site. We choose our times carefully - very early in the morning (between 6-8am) or late in the evening (after 6pm). Most days we do not encounter a single rail trail user, or battery visitor, and only the odd other dog walker. We always ensure that the dogs are on-lead on and near the actual trail, and avoid any times that the site may be busy (eg long weekends, public holidays etc). We have never encountered any issues, only a great positive place for locals to meet. I also know that many of the regular users often carry out minor maintenance (eg clearing drains after heavy rainfall, removing low hanging branches, weeding etc) and also keep an eye on the site in general. I believe the site would be almost completely empty during the winter months were it not for the dog walkers. We welcome the addition of any new dog exercise areas, and would certainly endeavour to make the most of the new proposed site. However, my concerns with the proposed new site are that it will not be a large enough area for most people to consider it worthwhile to go to. It would be a shame if a lot of money was spent in setting up and maintaining the area for it to be used by very few. My proposals going forward would be as follows - - New Waikino site to go ahead, but on a larger scale, making the most of the reserve site already there. - Off-leash access at the Waikino Battery site at restricted times (much like Waihi Beach, ie before 9am and after 5pm), but excluding the actual rail trail and 10 metres either side of it. Thanks for your time. Krystal Glen If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 15 Apr 16 18:19:08 1/1

294 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 55 Name of Submitter MIKE BALSOM # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 17.1 Dog control The submitter's comments are noted. on private properties Reason for Request The submitter is concerned about the amount of dogs that are allowed to roam loose around homes on private properties and believes that trades people, the elderly and children are all at risk from entering these properties. Decision Sought That a bylaw be created to allow persons to safely enter a property and approach the front door without being accosted by the resident s dog. Currently dogs deemed as dangerous dogs must be kept in a fully fenced secure area of the property that people do not have to enter to gain access to an entrance of the dwelling. This is also a requirement to gain responsible dog owner status with the Council. This fencing requirement does not extend to owners of dogs that have not undergone the responsible owner licence training. Regulatory staff have advised that it would be unjustified to make all urban dog owners keep their dogs securely fenced on private property so people did not have to come into contact with the dog in order to enter the dwelling.

295 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 56

296 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 57 Name of Submitter MATT GLEN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 19.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposal for an off-leash area next to the Waikino reserve, but proposes that the off-leash area be within the Domain, as it is a larger area, fully fenced and seldom used as a cow paddock and for one weekend of Waikino cricket. The submitter currently uses the Victoria Battery site to walk his two dogs, and would more likely use the reserve. Decision Sought That the new proposed off-leash dog exercise area be located within the fenced section of the Waikino Domain and a small carpark be built next to it. The submitter's support and comments are noted. The Domain land is currently leased and used for grazing which is why the Council proposed to utilise the area of road reserve off Waitekauri road and adjacent to the Domain as a dog exercise area. The fencing would need to be changed to align with the road reserve's legal boundary making the proposed dog exercise area larger in size; approximately 80 long and 45 metres at its widest point. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department. The requirements of the site will be established if the proposed dog exercise area is developed.

297 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 58 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Matt Glen OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: i think its a great idea having a off leash dog walking park, next to the reserve. But maybe it would be better just to have it in the Reserve thats not currently being used aside from one wkend of Waikino cricket. This is a larger area, also fully fenced and then would just need a small carpark. its a shame to see this Reserve as a cow paddock thats also very seldom used as that. We have 2 dogs and would use either of these areas but more likely the Reserve, as we are currently walking them mostly at the Battery Site. Cheers Matt If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Sun, 17 Apr 16 20:48:17 1/1

298 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 59 Name of Submitter LIANNE POTTER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 20.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposal for an off-leash area in Waikino and suggests equipment for an agility type course would be more of benefit for dogs and their owners. The submitter has used the Victoria Battery site for 20 years as a dog exercise area and doesn t understand why dogs cannot be exercised at the site as there are no native animals habiting the site and the dogs are kept under control so they do not trouble cyclists. Decision Sought That the new proposed off-leash dog exercise area is designated in Waikino which would include an agility type course and that the Victoria Battery site be designated as a dog exercise area. The submitter's support for a dog exercise area in Waikino is noted. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

299 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 60

300 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 61

301 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 62 Name of Submitter BRETT POTTER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 21.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposal for a dog exercise area in Waikino as he currently has to walk his dog on the road as there are no footpaths. The submitter is concerned about walking his dog through the cricket pitch. Decision Sought That a new dog exercise area is designated in Waikino. The submitter's support for a dog exercise area to be established in the vicinity of the Waikino Domain is noted.

302 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 63

303 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 64 Name of Submitter MELISSA PILKINTON # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 22.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposal for a fenced off-leash area in Waikino as this would allow a safe environment for the dogs to be exercise. Decision Sought That a new fenced off-leash dog exercise area is designated in Waikino. The submitter's support for a dog exercise area in the vicinity of the Waikino Domain is noted. Because the Domain land is currently leased and used for grazing the Council have proposed to utilise the area of road reserve off Waitekauri road and adjacent to the Domain as a dog exercise area. The fencing would need to be changed to align with the road reserve's legal boundary making the proposed dog exercise area larger in size; approximately 80 metres long and 45 metres at its widest point. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

304 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 65

305 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 66 Name of Submitter HEATHER PRINCE # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 27.1 Dog Exercise The submitter's comments are noted. Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter lives near the Waikino Domain, is a member of the Waikino Domain Board and does not currently own a dog. The submitter is disappointed that notification of the proposed new dog exercise area for Waikino was only provided to current dog owners and not those persons that occupy properties within the immediate vicinity of the proposed new site. The submitter opposes the proposal for a new dog exercise area near Waikino Domain due to the cost to ratepayers, the foreseeable maintenance issues and believes that the facility would rarely be used as the Victoria Battery site is the preferred facility by dog owners. The submitter believes if dogs being exercised at the Victoria Battery site are a problem then the Department of Conservation (DOC) should oversee it and not the Council. DOC should provide a fenced area immediately over the bridge, possibly with Council s assistance, and that a time restraint for exercising dogs be allocated in the early mornings and evenings. Decision Sought That the proposed dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain is not approved and that the Department of Conservation address the issues surrounding the use of Victoria Battery site as a dog exercise area. Council staff liaised directly with the Chair of the Waikino Domain Board and the Chair of the Waikino Liaison Committee about this proposal. The proposal was discussed at the most recent meeting of the Domain Board which was attended by the Council's Parks and Reserves Manager and Councillor Tubman. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

306 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 67

307 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 68

308 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 69 Name of Submitter JANE BARLOW # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 28.1 Dog control - general Reason for Request The submitter supports Council s Dog Control proposal and would like harsher penalties applied to deter dog owners from allowing their dogs to roam. Decision Sought That Council adopt the proposed Dog Control Policy 2016 and Dog Control Bylaw 2007 and, That Council impose harsher penalties on dog owners that allow their dogs off-leash within on-leash dog areas, and for those owners that do not contain their dogs within their properties. The submitter's support and comments are noted. The penalty for breaches of the Council's dog control bylaw are established by the Dog Control Act 1996 and therefore the Council does not have the power to increase the amount dog owners must pay if they commit an infringement offence. However, the Council has indicated that it will seize menacing and dangerous dogs, rather than issue several infringements, if the owners are not complying with the Act or Council's dog control bylaw.

309 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 70

310 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 71 Name of Submitter WENDY MERRICK # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 29.1 Dog Exercise The submitter s comments are noted. Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter owns a dog and prefers using a large area to exercise her dog that would provide plenty of mental stimulation and physical activity. She suggests that the proposed dog exercise area near the Waikino Domain would be too small for this purposes as well as the current area allocated on Consols Street, Waihi. Like other dog owners the submitter prefers to use the Victoria Battery site which is large and provides plenty of stimulation for her dog. Decision Sought That Council investigate the possibility of providing an off-leash dog exercise area at the Victoria Battery site that can be used in the early morning and late afternoon. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

311 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 72 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Wendy Merrick OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I am a dog owner in the area. We (my husband and myself) have owned large dogs for over 25 years. When exercising our dogs, we need to take them to an area full of interest to them. They need mental stimulation as well as physical activity. They get such stimulation by investigating areas of nooks and crannies, trees and bushes, other animal smells, tracks and trails. In my opinion, the proposed area at Waikino is neither large enough nor interesting enough to provide dogs with enough mental and physical stimulation. Our dogs have always needed a good hour following tracks, running and playing off lead to fill up their senses and come home happy and tired. A third of an acre is nowhere near large enough to keep them occupied. This is no doubt why the Victoria Battery site is so popular with dog owners. This area is large enough for physical activity and has enough to occupy a dog mentally. In contrast, I rarely see dog owners exercising their dogs at the Consol St park (as an example), which is, to be frank, boring to any dog after 5 minutes. An arrangement whereby dogs could be allowed off lead in the morning and evening hours at Victoria Battery would be a much better solution. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 28 Apr 16 15:02:05 1/1

312 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 73 Name of Submitter WENDY JOY BAKER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 30.1 Dog Exercise The submitter's comments are noted. Areas Gilmour Reserve Waihi Reason for Request The submitter thanks Council for the dogs on-leash sign installed at Gilmore Reserve. At the recent Anzac Day ceremonies held at the reserve the submitter was upset that dogs were allowed off-leash during the service and requests that the Council provide more policing of this area, especially at weekends, to ensure dogs are kept on-leash. Decision Sought That Council provide more dog control patrols at the Gilmour Reserve, especially at weekends, to ensure dogs are kept onleash. The Council's dog control officers undertake patrols of the District when they are not attending reported incidences.

313 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 74 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Wendy Joy Baker OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Hello I would like to firstly congratulate council on their dogs on leads signage at Gilmore Reserve Waihi. However, as a visitor to your area for ANZAC Day ceremonies, I found it upsetting that there were some dog owners who did not have their dogs on leads (24th April), particularly in the peaceful area of the Tunnelling Company Memorial. (refer attached photo). Please could there be more patrolling of this area, especially on weekends, as it is a lovely place for everyone to enjoy and dogs should be on a lead. Thank You Regard Wendy If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 29 Apr 16 08:03:40 1/1

314 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 75

315 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 76 Name of Submitter MICHAEL LOUIS VINE # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 31.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach - Southern End Reason for Request The submitter requests that the rules at Whiritoa should stay as they are or proposes that if a dog control restrictions needs to placed at the southern end of the beach that it should be dogs on-leash only from Moray Place. Decision Sought That Council reconsider the proposal and as a minimum allow dogs to be exercised on-leash at the southern end of the Whiritoa Beach from Moray Place.. The Department of Conservation has requested that dogs are banned from the southern end of Whiritoa beach to better protect dotterels for two main reasons: There have been direct dog attacks on dotterels and eggs in the past. It is an issue if dogs are in too close a proximity to nests because the dotterel parents will undertake distraction displays to lead intruders (dogs) away from the eggs/chicks. This means if there are constant threats to the birds they might be off their nests for long periods of time which can lead the eggs to overheat/cool depending on the weather conditions, making the eggs unviable. If the parents have chicks they will get them to run into the dunes and hide. Prolonged amounts of time hiding can cause the chicks to feed less and grow slower, meaning more time on the ground before they can fly, where they are more susceptible to predators. While dogs being on a leash might stop direct dog attacks on dotterels and their eggs it is unlikely to stop dotterels undertaking distraction displays. The Secretary of the Whangamata Trust, which owns a large part of the foreshore at the southern end of the beach as private land in that Trust, does not support dogs being permitted at the southern end of the beach whether on a leash or not.

316 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 77 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Mike Vine OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Leave the Whiritoa rules as they are. If southern end of the beach needs restrictions from Moray Place allow dogs on leash only If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 28 Apr 16 21:18:40 1/1

317 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 78 Name of Submitter SUSAN BARBARA VINE # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 32.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Whiritoa Beach Southern End Reason for Request The submitter notes that the majority of dog owners that use the beach are responsible and the interaction between dogs and the public is generally positive. The submitter believes that dogs should be allowed to be exercised off-leash in public places, yet kept under control by a responsible owner, rather that restricting them to designated dog exercise areas. Dog owners are encouraged to act responsibly, evaluate the circumstance to ensure their dogs do not become a nuisance, and any conflict can be resolved and managed that would protect the public, manage the pet population, prevent animal cruelty and balance the interest of people in the community. Decision Sought That Council leave the Whiritoa dog control restrictions as they are or reconsider the proposal and allow dogs to be exercised on-leash at the southern end of the Whiritoa Beach from Moray Place. The Department of Conservation has requested that dogs are banned from the southern end of Whiritoa beach to better protect dotterels for two main reasons: There have been direct dog attacks on dotterels and eggs in the past. It is an issue if dogs are in too close a proximity to nests because the dotterel parents will undertake distraction displays to lead intruders (dogs) away from the eggs/chicks. This means if there are constant threats to the birds they might be off their nests for long periods of time which can lead the eggs to overheat/cool depending on the weather conditions, making the eggs unviable. If the parents have chicks they will get them to run into the dunes and hide. Prolonged amounts of time hiding can cause the chicks to feed less and grow slower, meaning more time on the ground before they can fly, where they are more susceptible to predators. While dogs being on a leash might stop direct dog attacks on dotterels and their eggs it is unlikely to stop dotterels undertaking distraction displays. The Secretary of the Whangamata Trust, which owns a large part of the foreshore at the southern end of the beach as private land in that Trust, does not support dogs being permitted at the southern end of the beach whether on a leash or not.

318 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 79 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Sue Vine OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: Leave the Whiritoa rules as they are. Maybe if restrictions are needed at Southern end from Moray Place allow dogs leashed in that area only. Dog owners are generally responsible & dogs / owners enjoy fun on the beach together. The Principles of other council eg Tauranga City Council places high priority on ensuring that dogs are registered. We recognize that the large majority of dog owners are very responsible and as a result the interaction between dogs and the public is generally postive. Dogs need the ability to excise unrestrained and within a social setting. Therefore rather than restrictions dogs to designated dog exercise areas, they are able to be exercised unleashed in public places as long as when circumstances require the dog can be leashed immediately. Dog owners are encouraged to act responsible, evaluate the circumstances and then to take all resonsable steps to ensure that their dogs do not cause a nuisance. We believe that conflicts can be resolved and managed in a way that protects the public, manages the pet population, prevents cruelty to animals and balance the interests of many people in the community. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Thu, 28 Apr 16 22:00:34 1/1

319 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 80 Name of Submitter SHERYL HELLYER # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 35.1 Prohibited The submitter's comments are noted. Areas for Dogs Reason for Request The submitter does not support the ban on dogs and prefers that dogs should be allowed on a lead at all times. Decision Sought That Council amend any reference to prohibited areas for dogs in the Dog Control policy and bylaw to allow dogs to be exercised on a lead at all times. It is not appropriate to have a blanket policy allowing dogs on a leash in all public places. The Council has prohibited dogs from specific sites for specific reasons, for example, dogs are prohibited from children's playgrounds to provide for the better protection of children.

320 Version Date: Thu, 31 Mar 16 10:48:24 1/1 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 81 Submission on the Draft Dog Control Policy 2016 and/or review of the Dog Control Bylaw 2007 Name: Address: Note: Submissions close 4.30pm, Monday 2 May 2016 Sheryl Hellyer OFFICE USE ONLY Document No:... File No: PPN Phone (daytime): I/we would like to speak in support of my/our submission at the Hearing of Submissions scheduled for Wednesday, 25 May Yes No Privacy Act Note: A copy of this submission will be sent to this address. Please be aware when providing personal information that all submissions are part of the public consultation process and as such may be reproduced and included in Council public documents such as Council agendas and minutes. These documents are available to the public both in hardcopy and electronic form (including on the Council s website). If you are an individual rather than an organisation we will remove your personal contact details from the submission form if you tick the following box: I do not give permission for my personal details to be released to persons under the Official Information Act General Submission: I don't support the ban on dogs and would to see it as dogs must be on a lead at all times. If your submission is larger than the text boxes allow you may wish to upload as a separate document: Choose File No file selected Submit Produced: Fri, 08 Apr 16 10:57:36 1/1

321 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 82 Name of Submitter BERNARD DUNCKER and RAEWYN ADAMS # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 37.1 Dog Exercise The submitter's comments are noted. Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter opposes the proposal for an off-leash dog exercise area to be developed near the Waikino Domain as it would not be an appealing area for dog owners and become an unnecessary cost for building a parking area and fencing. The submitter proposes that an off-leash dog exercise area be designated at the Victoria Battery site with restricted hours of access, similar to the hours set at Waihi Beach, as this would be a more interesting location. Decision Sought That Council does not proceed with the proposal to develop a dog exercise area near the Waikino Domain and instead designate an off-leash dog exercise area at the Victoria Battery site with restricted hours of access, similar to the hours set at Waihi Beach. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

322 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 83

323 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 84

324 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 85 Name of Submitter MARY ELIZABETH BEVAN # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 38.1 Dog Exercise Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter supports the proposed offleash dog exercise on Waitekauri Road, Waikino, and suggests the area should be fenced, have a car parking area, large trees for shade, two seats (one located in the shade and other in the clearing), dog agility equipment and a water tap. The submitter believes if the facilities she proposes are included at the Domain, including the re-instatement of the BBQ and playground, then the area would be well used. The submitter requests that the main gates to the Waikino Domain be left unlocked, when it is not being grazed by stock, to allow easier access. Decision Sought That the proposed dog exercise area near the Waikino Domain progresses, including fencing the area, providing a car park, maintaining the large trees, installing two seats, dog agility equipment, water tap, BBQ and playground; and the main gates to the Waikino Domain should be left unlocked when it is not being grazed by stock. The submitter's support for a dog exercise area in Waikino is noted. Her suggestions for the area are also noted. The main gate to the Waikino Domain is currently locked because members of the public have left the gate open in the past and the stock that graze on the Domain escaped onto the road. Staff do not recommend that the gate be left unlocked as the land is leased for the purposes of grazing and it is therefore inappropriate for people to enter and remain on the Domain (unless it is for the yearly cricket match). Staff are currently in discussions with the leasee about public access to the swimming hole. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

325 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 86

326 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 87

327 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 88 Name of Submitter TESSA KOSTYRKA # Topic Summary of Submission Staff Comments 39.1 Dog Exercise The submitter s comments are noted. Areas Waikino Reason for Request The submitter believes the proposed offleash dog exercise area near the Waikino Domain is not large enough and would provide little interest for the dog or their owner. The submitter prefers using the Victoria Battery site to exercise her dog as it is safe from traffic and virtually enclosed and has no wildlife present. She proposes that dogs be allowed to be exercised off-leash at the Victoria Battery site and that dogs be restricted to on-leash between the hours of 10am to 4pm. Council staff have brought the public submissions on dog control at the Victoria Battery site to the attention of the Department of Conservation. Staff from the Department of Conservation have advised the Council that there is a dog onleash policy at the site to ensure public safety because the site is a very popular visitor destination and is used by many young families and a high number of cyclists. The Department is not willing to develop a dog off-leash area at the site for this reason. Decision Sought That Council designate an off-leash dog exercise area at the Victoria Battery site with restricted hours of on-leash between 10am to 4pm. The land is administered by the Department of Conservation so it is not the Councils place to designate an area of the site as a dog exercise area. Council staff recommend that the Council proceed with the development of a suitably sized dog exercise area adjacent to the Waikino Domain and that this project is coordinated by the community services department.

328 Summary of Submissions on Draft Dog Control Policy and Bylaw Page 89