Minutes of the KKRRPT August 21St 2007

Minutes of the KKRRPT August 21st 2007

Meeting opened 7.30pm

Present. M Grove, V Fergusson, J Edgar, P Parks, K Witten-Hannah, S Pye

Previous minutes:

Moved the minutes be accepted J Edgar. Seconded V Furgusson. Carried

Matters arising:

ARC still looking to remove the notice board. Option to place one on the front of the old toilet block. No action required for the moment.

Financial report:

Current balances

Some of these funds belong to the landcare group. Agreed that a separate account would be opened up to deposit these into.

Accounts have been redone until the end of December 2006 which is the official YE of the trust.

Correspondence:

WCC – Annual Plan

Watakare district Health care – Notice on health organisations public consultation

Friends of Arataki – Request to join (approved to pay $20)

WCC community board – Notice of meeting 31 July 2007-09-06

Reports:

ARC

Work completed on repairing access to the surf club completed

Discussion on ARC annual plan and beach use

Landcare

Beach clean up postponed to 2 December

Community board

13 September combined WCB and ratepayers meeting at Waiatarua Community Centre

Road signs – still awaiting some sign changes and reduction of reflection

Blue sign at top of Lone Kauri Rd (committee happy to leave this as is) some comment on distance from the intersection

Passing bays still poorly identified – still no action on making clearer

Lack of consistency over enforcing of variations on permits – some variations being signed of to remove the threat of litigation to council.

Piha café application – notice in Billboard if people want to make a submission. KKRRPT not to take a position, leave up to Piha to determine outcome.

Fire party

Call out to Mike Ferris car fire

Training undertaken at Henderson on communications

School

MOE not wanting to pay for full staffing

Looking to split out from Oratia school but still under the Oratia Board

Oratia Principal leaving at the end of 2007

Surf Club

Gearing up for the new season. New bikes x2, boat and motor

Building program progressing with geotec reports being done

Radio repeater being investigated for Whatipu

Club weekend coming up for 30 at Wahtipu 25 - 26 August

Web site

Being updated progressively by Matthew

Mathew to advise if any new soft ware is needed to facilitate this

Shellfish

NTR

Neighbourhood Support

Option for 2 cameras presented by J Edgar.

Need to investigate running costs J Edgar

Investigate police privacy and public hosting issues P Parks

General Business

Vanessa wanting to redraft. Issues to be dealt with:

Annual balance dates

Treatment of trustees and committee positions

Vanessa to review and make recommendations

Septic tanks

Discussion over Septic tank issues and community schemes. S Pye raised the issue that the current program had not improved local conditions. Why was the council going through the same scenarios again without reviewing other options.

Copy of communication and council response attached.

Meeting closed 8.59pm

Dear Stephen and Joanna,

Thank you for your email and your support of our initiatives and objectives and volunteering to be part of the survey.

You have a raised a number of important issues which I would like to attempt to address.

Council has been meeting with a Local Agenda Group for Piha and Kerekere on at least a quarterly annual basis to discuss local issues relating to septic tanks. This group was challenged with steering Council on ways forward to improve the environmental effects and issues surrounding septic tanks in the rural area. Council also held a joint workshop (a couple on Months ago) now in North Piha and invites were sent to each house holder and house owner in the area. The turn out was a little disappointing? However discussions did take place and Council received a very clear message from the community that they wanted Council to take action on residents who fail to maintain their septic tank system. Council wishes to work with residents on finding solutions if they indeed have a problem. It is great that you invested in a new system and as you state these are not cheap. However not everyone has replaced their system and indeed any new system is no guarantee that there are no problems. The maintenance and good practices is key to ensuring that systems work at their optimum. The meeting also identified areas of concern and some public properties and toilets that needed to be investigated, and some stormwater issues. These have been included in this survey. The results of these surveys will give Council and residents some idea of the extent of any problem. A similar exercise in Huia and Cornwallis revealed that over 50% of septic tank systems surveyed had problems and some residents were also surprised that even some new systems were not working properly when the surveys were undertaken.

Council intends to survey all properties in due course, but it was agreed that these higher risk areas should be done first.

A discussion took place around clustering septic tanks together which has been practiced in other areas and countries as your email states. Support for this was mixed at the meeting, and was generally not supported by the residents attending. Rather putting the emphasis on individual residents taking responsibility for ensuring their private system was maintained and working as it should. The issue of clustering multiple tanks is difficult in this area as no obvious land is suitable to build any centralised treatment system. Council has no mandate nor signalled anything in the Long Term Council Community Plan for any centralised system. This does not prevent this issue being investigated. The costs of such systems are expensive and must also gain Resource Consent.

In terms of your issue regarding environmental effects of septic tanks not working. Investigations have been progressing. A new completed report on contamination of the Piha lagoon has proved inconclusive. In fact birds such as ducks were identified as possible causes of poor water quality. A newsletter will be distributed shortly presenting these findings.

In conclusion the issues surrounding septic tanks are complex. We know these have a finite life and the burden of maintenance falls on the individual owners. You can indeed help by working with the Piha and Kerekere Ratepayers Association Group and gaining public support for this cause. Council intends to listen and consult with residents and help find the causes of pollution and remedy these where it can. Again your assistance would be most appreciated.

Note, I have deliberately not commented on your cost claims in your email, as I do not have the historical costs of the surveys etc to hand.

I have attempted to try and answer your email. If you have further questions I would happy to meet with you.

Martin Glover

EcoWater Services Delivery Manager

City Services

DDI 09 835 0295

09 839 0400 Ext 8295

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Pye & Joanna Williamson" <>
To: <>
Cc: "Bob Harvey" <>,"Kubi Witten-Hannah" <>
Sent: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 00:14:59 +1200
Subject: Attention Martin Glover EcoWater Services Delivery Manager [InteractionID: 707db8a8-e3e4-4bc7-bdd7-29a8d2aa2ba5]

Dear Martin

I will try to keep this brief, so a follow up conversation may be required to expand but you should generally understand what I am trying to achieve.

I have received your letter requesting to access my property at 50 Karekare Rd to assess the septic system. I grant this request unreservedly and am fully supportive of your objectivessubject to the following comments.

In the early 1990's a study was done by Worley's (cost circa $1m plus other costs). This included extensive consultation and studies around possible onsite wastewater systems. At the local Karekare meeting (x 2) I raised the issue that onsite wastewater systems were not suitable options for the West Coast and what considerations were being examined for community based systems. It was generally agreed by the consultants and the council that there were challenges to achieving a reliable onsite wastewater systems and that none were “guaranteed of success”. Never the less the review was about what onsite wastewater systems might provide the best options rather than identifying a long term and fail proof system.

The outcome from this was that all properties at Piha and Karekare would be surveyed and those failing inspections would be ordered to upgrade their systems to those identified as being the best onsite wastewater system options. This survey shall we say (cost circa $200k). In the case of my property I got a clean bill of health. Great, but the system on my property had a system failure that I had identified and had contracted work to be done to rectify. The property was re-inspected at my request and I received a failure notice and order to undertake work. This was done willingly at a (cost of $14k to myself).

As a consequence of these site assessments there was work done by many ratepayers in the Karekare and Piha area. Lets assume an average or $10k x 500 properties (cost circa $5m). Plus new properties or upgrades have had to install highly spec'ed systems, which by all indications are not assisting in remedying the overall situation (cost circa $1.5m). Plus numerous other Council and ratepayer costs such as further consultants, council resources, pumping program etc (cost circa $5m)

You have also highlighted that there has been a steadily increasing level of pollutants in the local streams, lagoons and marine waters of both communities. In your letter you state that there is an interest to further survey properties that have site features such as proximity to streams or overland flow paths, high water tables, restricted site areas, soil type, or ground slope and or stability issues. These definitions cover the entire Piha and Karekare area so I am confused as to how 100 high priority properties can be defined. This can only be done scientifically if you can define the performance of each site. Clearly this is not the case, so what is the basis of the selection.

If these 100 sites are inspected and all ordered to undertake work resulting in not further improvement what then?

So in summary:

We have spent in excess $12m

Pollution has got worse

We did done nothing and have continued to do nothing around community treatment systems

We are about to repeat the program of the past 10 or so years.

Clearly it is madness to keep doing the same thing and expect a different or better result.

For the money spent, both Piha and Karekare could have installed fail proof community based systems and had these in operation for the past 10 years. Having done this the level of pollutants in both these areas would be next to zero. My understanding that this is the practice in many if not most communities in environmentally sensitive or at risk locations (including small communities) in North America and developed Europe. A point I highlighted at the outset of the current program over ten years ago.

Given our city's so called EcoCity status and focus I find the current situation rather perplexing. In my view Eco is about ecological performance and the foresight required to achieve this. Given the range of options explored and implemented and the results to date none of these are present at this point in the resolution of this issue. One might say quite the opposite and verging on inertia.

I want to see pure water at Piha and Karekare. I am sure most people connected with the area do. I, and probably they are happy to spend money to achieve this. I am not however happy to spend money to successfully fail again, which would appear to be the most probable outcome from following the same unsuccessful strategy as before.

I don't expect another order to undertake work from my council. I do expect a leading ecological solution that will guarantee a quality wastewater system solution for our small West Coast communities and our EcoCity?

What is being done to provide this to me, and my fellow ratepayers in the Piha and Karekare area?

Can I help in any way?

Yours truly

Stephen Pye

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

Note:
This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient.

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to be the views of any such entity.

Thank You.