140/15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "140/15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409"

Transcription

1 140/15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

2 Quality Assurance Statement: Quality Assurance Statement Version 1 December 2017 Southland District Status Draft Council 15 Forth Street Invercargill 9840 Project Manager: Prepared by: AMP Colin Pemberton, Property Asset Management Officer Author Telephone 0800 Reviewed by: Kevin McNaught, Strategic Property Manager Fax: Approved for issue Council (27 February 2018) by:

3 Contents Executive Summary Introduction Purpose of this Plan Activity Description What we do Why we do it Objectives of the Water Structures Activity Overview of Management Plan Limitations Plan Framework Strategic Direction Strategic and Corporate Goals Strategic Priorities Key Issues Key issues for the next ten years Changes Made to the Activity Key Projects Our Levels of Service Customer Expectations Planning Framework Levels of Service, Performance Measures and Targets Plans Programmed to Meet the Level of Service Managing Future Demand Predicting Future Demand for the Service Demand Forecasts Implications of Growth/Demand Demand Management Strategies Asset Management Strategies to Manage Demand Plans Programmed to Meet Growth/Demand Changes Sustainability District-Wide Asset Management Strategies Overview of the Water Structures Assets Approach to Operations and Maintenance Approach to Renewals Upgrading and Developing New Assets for Levels of Service and Demand Financial Summary Year Financial Forecast Key Assumptions Funding Principles Valuation Approach Activity Specific Assumptions Water Structures AMP ii 140/15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

4 10. Significant Effects, Risk Management & Quality Assurance Significant Effects Asset Management Improvement Plan Progress against Previous AM Improvement Programme Assessing Current and Desired AM Practices AM Improvement Plan Water Structures AMP iii 140/15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

5 Executive Summary The Services Provided Southland District Council owns the following water structures : Five jetties on Stewart Island, Several wharves, a boat ramp and navigation aids in Riverton Harbour, Eight boat ramps and a retaining wall in the Waiau Catchment. A viewing platform at Riverton What We Aim to Achieve Council s intention is to: maintain the asset base at a level that meets the needs of the community and fit for purpose ensure the assets are safe to use and have the appropriate certificates and equipment. Demand Management Strategies Table 1-1: Water Structures Performance Framework A project looking at the use, future need and costs of the Stewart Island jetties is being undertaken as this AMP is being prepared. The outcome of this project may well deliver a change to the demand strategy set out below. Reported increased interest in the Riverton wharves suggests a demand strategy should be prepared during the term of this AMP. As the existing Waiau Basin facilities have the capacity to meet demand at all times, a demand management strategy is not currently required. Asset Management Strategies / Lifecycle Asset Management To achieve Council s intentions, the general asset management strategy is to: Ensure that the maintenance and renewal requirements identified during condition assessment in 2014 are appropriately funded, prioritised and scheduled; and Work with the governance bodies to identify capital or maintenance requirements to meet community needs. The most significant projects planned in the next 10 years include: Golden Bay wharf rebuild Main wharf extensions Ulva Island Jetty rebuild Little Glory jetty refurbishment Fred s Camp jetty refurbishment Port William Jetty refurbishment Millers Beach Jetty refurbishment Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

6 Repairs to the Ulva Island Jetty undertaken in November 2013 have extended the life of that structure sufficiently to allow its ongoing use until the planning for a replacement was undertaken. The rebuild of the Ulva Island jetty is now programmed for 2019/20. The Port William Jetty was rebuilt in late The previous structure had become unsafe to use. In the year horizon ( ), we expect significant replacements/refurbishments to be required as follows: 2026/27 Millers Beach Jetty replacement $100, /31 Refurbishment of Little Glory Jetty $20, /33 Refurbishment of Fred s Camp Jetty $20, /35 Refurbishment of Port William Jetty $20, /37 Refurbishment of Millers Beach Jetty $20, /39 Refurbishment of Ulva Island Jetty $20, /41 Refurbishment of Little Glory Jetty $20, /43 Refurbishment of Fred s Camp Jetty $20, /45 Refurbishment of Port William Jetty $20,000. Key Issues, Options and Implications Key Issues Options Implications Condition of jetties, cost of maintaining and limited community / users from which to raise funds, means this is not a straight forward fix. During 2017 a Community Consultation has taken place, a full report was received by council in August Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP. Various potential outcomes, but rather than speculate, the outcome of review project should be awaited. Significant financial liabilities will need to be addressed. Waiau amenities (boat ramps on river and gabion basket at Manapouri). Ownership of existing boat ramps around coast 1. Status Quo 2. Funding is local i.e. Ward/CB/CDA. 1. Status Quo no Council ownership Costs will be needed at some stage but funding not identified. Significant financial liabilities that need to be addressed. Ulva Island Jetty Replacement Plans for replacement wharf have been approved. Local rating base totally inadequate to fund such large scale projects. Most funding sourced. Awaiting confirmation of last portion before construction commences. Table 1-2: Key Issues Options and Implications Financial Summary Grant Income has been forecast to fund the Golden Bay Wharf upgrade in 2018/2019. Operations and maintenance activity has been largely reactive over the past few years. This is especially true for Stewart Island Jetties with Council having only assumed ownership of these assets in The Port William Jetty was rebuilt in 2014/2015. Urgent repairs were undertaken to the Ulva Island Jetty in 2013, with a complete rebuild programmed for 2019/2020. Replacement of the Golden Bay wharf has also been budgeted to commence during the 2018/2019. A cycle of 10 yearly refurbishments is planned for all jetties with user pay contributions to fund the annual maintenance of the Stewart Island structures. The increase in forecast depreciation is due to the replacement of the Water Structures on Stewart Island. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

7 Thousands Thousands $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Renewals Acquisition-Level of Service Acquisition-Demand Vested Assets Work in Progress Maintenance Costs Operating Costs Income Figure 1-1: Water Structures Financial Summary (excluding depreciation) $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Renewals Level of Service Demand Work in Progress Vested Assets Depreciation Figure 1-2: Water Structures Capex Summary Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

8 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Plan The purpose of this plan is to document the Southland District Council s (SDC or the Council) asset management practices and achieve an optimised life cycle strategy for the water structures infrastructure for the next 30 years. This is a long term planning document. It represents the aspirations of SDC and will be reviewed every three years. The budgets and timeframes provided in this plan will be recommended to the Council for adoption through the Long Term Council Plan (LTP) and Annual Plan processes. 2. Activity Description 2.1 What we do This activity provides infrastructure (boat ramps, jetties, wharves and navigation aids) which enable recreational and commercial access to waterways. The water structures activity relates only to assets located within the Riverton Harbour, Stewart Island and Waiau Catchment. The Stewart Island Jetties ownership was assumed from South Port in The Riverton Harbour Assets have been passed on through successive local government reorganisations. The Waiau Catchment boat ramps and Pearl Harbour (Gabion Basket) Retaining Wall, were part of an ECNZ community compensation package, coming out of the Manapouri Hydro Scheme. The Riverton Focal Point was a Riverton Community Board initiative, with Council subsequently funding installation of the disabled persons/wheelchair lift. Riverton Harbour Public Boat Ramp. Public Wharf (L45). Rock protection wall behind wharves L40 to L43. Wharf L35. Walkway to wharves L35/L36. Decking on the Long Wharf (L22 to L30). Navigation aids (5). Stewart Island Ulva Island Jetty. Little Glory Jetty. Fred s Camp Jetty. Miller s Beach Jetty. Port William Jetty. Waiau Catchment Te Anau Downs Boat Ramp. Te Anau Boat Harbour Boat Ramp. Steamer Wharf Boat Ramp. Queens Reach Boat Ramp. Pearl Harbour, Manapouri, Boat Ramp. Pearl Harbour, Manapouri, Retaining Wall. Monowai Boat Ramp. Tuatapere Reserve Boat Ramp. Te Waewae Lagoon Boat Ramp. Other Water Structures Riverton Viewing Platform (Focal Point) Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

9 2.2 Why we do it Water structure infrastructure like boat ramps, jetties, wharves and navigation aids enable recreational and commercial access to waterways as well as ability for residents and visitors to access services from service centres where the only access available is by water. The activity also supports the environment by having stopbanks and marine walls which protect the environment from flooding as well as safety by having aids which improve navigation. 2.3 Objectives of the Water Structures Activity The water structures activity in Southland District Council (SDC) is focused on the achievement of the following objective: Provision of water structures that are safe to use and maintained in a way which enable recreational and commercial use and allow people to access services, facilities and places. The standard to which this objective will be delivered is outlined by the Levels of Service detailed in Section Overview of Management The assets covered in this plan are the responsibility of the Council s Services and Assets Group/Property Management Department under the strategic direction of Council, the Executive Leadership Team and Community Boards. Asset management responsibilities are covered in detail in Council s Asset Management Policy. Service delivery is provided as follows: Operation and maintenance (O&M) is delivered by contractors as required. Capital works design is provided by consulting engineers as required. Procurement and day to day management is undertaken by the respective Community Engineer, in conjunction with the relevant Community Boards or Wharf/Harbour Committee. 2.5 Plan Limitations This Asset Management Plan is a Minimum-Core 1 Asset Management Plan and is intended to set out how SDC manages the water structures in a way that is appropriate for a broader readership including executive management of SDC, elected members, interest groups, commercial operators associated with the management and/or use of the water structures and the general community. A key limitation in previous plans was the lack of formal condition assessment information on which to base future maintenance and renewal requirements. Recent assessments (2014) of both the Stewart Island and Riverton Harbour structures including the Focal Point, means the information used in this Plan is current. 2.6 Plan Framework The AM Plan framework is illustrated in Figure 2-1. Corporate information common to all AM Plans has been included in a separate document - AMP Part A (r/16/8/12686). District-wide information and strategies are documented in the main body of this Plan. Information on locally funded activities and services are included in the Appendices to this Plan. 1 As defined in the NAMS IIMM 2011 Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

10 Figure 2-1: Asset Management Plan Framework Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

11 3. Strategic Direction 3.1 Strategic and Corporate Goals The Council has adopted a Strategic Framework that identifies where the Council wants to be in the future (vision) and the outcomes it aims to achieve to meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions (community outcomes). The framework also outlines how it will achieve these (mission and approach) along with the key challenge it faces in doing so and its resulting strategic priorities. The framework guides staff and informs future planning and policy direction and forms the basis for the performance framework. Additional information about the Council s strategic framework is included in AMP Part A (r/16/8/12686). Table 3-1 outlines how the Water Supply activity contributes to the Council s community outcomes using a benefits mapping diagram. The full levels of service and performance management framework is presented in section Table 5-3. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

12 Table 3-1: Activity Contribution to Council Outcomes Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

13 3.2 Strategic Priorities The Council has identified four priority areas in response to the key strategic challenges facing the Council and the community to achieve the Vision and Community Outcomes (refer Strategic Framework in AMP Part A r/16/8/12686 for more details). The contribution that the activity makes to these Strategic Priorities are shown in Table 3-2. Strategic Priorities 1. Improve how we work 2. Provide appropriate 3. Make informed decisions 4. More people Contribution Area infrastructure/services What will be done in the long-term (next 10 years) What will be done in the short-term (next 3 years) Assessment, rationalisation and consolidation of the Stewart Island structures. Review of the Stewart island structures completed with recommendations for future ownership and management. The Stewart Island structures review will deliver outcomes on what structures should be retained and standards required. Deliver the level of structures and services identified in Review. The Stewart Island Structures Review will provide good information on which to make sound decisions for long term. The Review will ensure all appropriate information is available on which to make informed decisions. The Stewart Island Structures Review will identify how to increase revenue to ensure all users are contributing. Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP.. Key Actions and Projects Stewart Island structures review. Ulva Island Jetty rebuild Funding for capital Waiau catchment projects to be investigated. To provide clarity for decisions to be made. Essential for commercial operations to continue at Ulva Island. Over time these structures will require replacement. Table 3-2: Activity Contribution to Strategic Priorities To provide clarity for decisions to be made Essential for commercial operations to continue at Ulva Island. Local funding. Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP. Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP. N/A Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

14 4. Key Issues 4.1 Key issues for the next ten years The most important issues relating to the Water Structures activity for the next ten years are shown in Key Issues Options Implications Condition of Stewart Island jetties, cost of maintaining and limited community / users from which to raise funds, means this is not a straight forward fix. Following Community Consultation, a report was received by Council in August Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP. Various potential outcomes, but consideration of report recommendations will determine these. Significant financial liabilities will need to be addressed. Assessment to be completed in first two years of this AMP. Waiau amenities (boat ramps on river and gabion basket at Manapouri). 1. Status Quo - local funding Costs will be needed at some stage but specific detail not identified when preparing this AMP. Ownership of existing boat ramps around coast 1. Status Quo no Council ownership There is no considered need to assume ownership of these structures that have been in place and used over many year without Council involvement. Significant financial liabilities if Council became involved. Ulva Island Jetty Replacement Stewart Island Main Wharf / infill - Community Board has requested an infill to the main wharf at Oban. Ownership of Golden Bay wharf Plans for replacement wharf have been approved. 1. Status quo do nothing 2. Undertake the infill work 1. Council ownership 2. Private ownership 3. Closed Local rating base totally inadequate to fund such large scale projects. Use of Stewart Island visitor levy fund seen as obvious long term funder. Most funding sourced. Awaiting confirmation of last portion before commencing construction. 1. No financial implications. 2. Funding ability. No obvious commercial contributor therefore reverting to community funding via Stewart Island Visitor Levy. 3. Triple ownership of the overall wharf structure South Port, Helen Cave and SDC. 1. Requirement to source significant funding to replace and operate at end of its operational life. 2. Not acceptable to Council. 3. Not acceptable to Council. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

15 Table 4-1. Key Issues Options Implications Condition of Stewart Island jetties, cost of maintaining and limited community / users from which to raise funds, means this is not a straight forward fix. Following Community Consultation, a report was received by Council in August Recommendations from this will be considered during term of this AMP. Various potential outcomes, but consideration of report recommendations will determine these. Significant financial liabilities will need to be addressed. Assessment to be completed in first two years of this AMP. Waiau amenities (boat ramps on river and gabion basket at Manapouri). 2. Status Quo - local funding Costs will be needed at some stage but specific detail not identified when preparing this AMP. Ownership of existing boat ramps around coast 2. Status Quo no Council ownership There is no considered need to assume ownership of these structures that have been in place and used over many year without Council involvement. Significant financial liabilities if Council became involved. Ulva Island Jetty Replacement Stewart Island Main Wharf / infill - Community Board has requested an infill to the main wharf at Oban. Ownership of Golden Bay wharf Plans for replacement wharf have been approved. 3. Status quo do nothing 4. Undertake the infill work 4. Council ownership 5. Private ownership 6. Closed Local rating base totally inadequate to fund such large scale projects. Use of Stewart Island visitor levy fund seen as obvious long term funder. Most funding sourced. Awaiting confirmation of last portion before commencing construction. 4. No financial implications. 5. Funding ability. No obvious commercial contributor therefore reverting to community funding via Stewart Island Visitor Levy. 6. Triple ownership of the overall wharf structure South Port, Helen Cave and SDC. 4. Requirement to source significant funding to replace and operate at end of its operational life. 5. Not acceptable to Council. 6. Not acceptable to Council. Table 4-1: Key Issues for the Activity Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

16 4.1.1 What are we planning Replacement of Ulva Island jetty has already been approved with construction programmed for 2019/20 subject to final amount of funding being sourced. Other proposals for the remaining jetties will come out of the Structures Review. 4.2 Changes Made to the Activity Table 4-2 summaries the key changes for the management of the Water Structures activity since the 2015 Activity Management Plan. Key Change Not so much change, but Reason for Change working through the issues for the Stewart Island jetties resulted in the Structures Review. Consideration of the recommendations in now received report, will enable decisions to be made for the future of these assets and there maybe change resulting from those decisions. Table 4-2: Key Changes to the Activity Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

17 4.3 Key Projects Table 4-3 details the key projects programmed for years 2018 to Riverton Harbour Project Name Description Type* Year $Amount Funding Source Howells Point light renewal Taramea (Howells Point) beacon light renewal REN 18/19 15,000 Reserves Wharves Inspection 6 yearly 6 Yearly inspection by Emtech MAINT PLAN Wharves Inspection 6 yearly 6 Yearly inspection by Emtech MAINT PLAN Stewart Island Jetties 23/24 11,182 Reserves 29/30 12,391 Reserves Project Name Description Type* Year $Amount Funding Source Golden Bay Wharf Rebuild Southport wharf negotiations to transfer ownership Oct 17 REN 18/19 200,000 Grants Golden Bay Wharf Rebuild Southport wharf negotiations to transfer ownership Oct 17 REN 19/20 400,000 Grants Main Wharf Extension On request from the Community Board REN 19/20 250,000 Loan Rebuild Ulva Island Jetty Rebuild Ulva Island Jetty REN 19/20 260,000 Reserves, contributions & donations Little Glory Jetty Refurbishment Little Glory Jetty Refurbishment MAINT 20/21 23,912 Grants PLAN Freds Camp Jetty Refurbishment Freds Camp Jetty Refurbishment MAINT 22/23 22,968 Grants PLAN Port William Jetty Refurbishment Port William Jetty Refurbishment MAINT 24/25 24,108 Grants PLAN Millars Beach Refurb Millars Beach Refurb REN 26/27 25,377 Grants Table 4-3: Key Projects Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

18 5. Our Levels of Service This section outlines why the Council is involved in this activity and the key drivers for levels of service, including customer expectations, legislative/regulatory requirements and Council outcomes. Section 5.3 details what level of service will be provided and the performance measures and targets which will be used to monitor performance. These levels of service and performance targets drive our operating, maintenance and investment strategies and therefore the forecast budgets and ultimately our judgements as to what we will do to promote community wellbeing/outcomes. 5.1 Customer Expectations In providing services it is important to understand what the customer using the service expects and if those expectations may change. The table below details the key customer groups, their expectations and any issues that this raises for the activity. Governance of both the Stewart Island Jetties, and the Riverton Harbour Structures is handled by Committees of Council - the Stewart Island Jetties Subcommittee and the Riverton Harbour Subcommittee. The Focal Point is under the governance of the Riverton Community Board. Users of the structures share common key interests, including accessible, safe infrastructure, and appropriate Navigation Aids. Currently there is no formal method for measuring performance, as general feedback is the only mechanism by which this information is collected. Expectations and key issues are simply obtained from historical feedback. Table 5-1: Customer Groups Customer stakeholder group How we understand their Specific Interests requirements Expectations and key issues. Recreational Users User feedback, surveys. Accessible and safe jetties and boat ramps. Harbour navigation aids. Focal Point Commercial Fishermen User feedback, surveys. Jetties with (where appropriate) water, power facilities, and unloading cranes. Harbour navigation aids. Tourism Operators User feedback, surveys. Accessible and safe jetties and boat ramps. Harbour navigation aids. Clean and well maintained facilities Customer satisfaction trends Table 5-2: Customer Expectations and Issues Since 2012 there have only been 3 requests in pathways for WHJFAU Wharf/Jetty faults. 5.2 Planning Framework Legislation, regulation and Council s existing strategies and policies mandate or influence some of the levels of service and performance targets we set, as illustrated in the table below for the Water Structures Activity. A full description of the Council policy and planning framework impacting AM Plans is included in the AMP Part A (r/16/8/12686). Legislation / Regulation / Planning Documents Resource Management Act How it affects levels of service and performance standards Outline any changes (implemented or pending) which is impacting the activity and describe how Environment Southland (ES) can grant consent for structures in coastal marine area to SDC enabling licences to granted by SDC to jetties/structures owners. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

19 Regional Coastal Plan The plan sets out a wide range of rules for all activities in the Coastal Area. Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 Schedule 15 defines the Aparima River and estuary as a statutory acknowledgement area. Also defines Lords River and Port Adventure (Stewart Island) as acknowledgement areas (although these are not currently in use as jetty locations). Maritime NZ Manual Building Act One section of the manual sets out requirements for Buoys and Beacons. Also more recently covered in the Maritime NZ New Zealand s Systems of Buoys and Beacons. Sets standards for building construction. Table 5-3: Planning Framework 5.3 Levels of Service, Performance Measures and Targets Levels of service (LOS), performance measures and targets form the performance framework for the activity detailing what the Council will provide, and to what level or standard: LOS are the outputs that are expected to be generated by the activity. They demonstrate the value being provided to the community or reflect how the public use or experience the service. A key objective of activity planning is to match the level of service provided with agreed expectations of customers and their willingness to pay for that level of service. Performance measures are quantifiable means for determining whether a LOS has been delivered and are generally broken into customer measures (which focus on how the public uses or experiences the service) or technical measures (which tend to be used internally to track performance or measure what the organisation does). Performance targets are the desired levels of performance against the performance measures. The levels of service provide the basis for the management strategies and works programmes identified in the AMP. By clarifying and defining the levels of service for the activity (and associated assets), Council can then identify and cost future operations, maintenance, renewal and development works required of the activity (and associated assets) to deliver that service level. This requires converting user s needs, expectations and preferences into meaningful levels of service. An overview of the context for levels of service is discussed in more detail in AMP Part A (r/16/8/12686). Table 5-4 details the levels of service, performance measures and performance targets for the Water Structures activity. The table sets out the Council s current performance and the targets it aims to achieve within the next three years and by the end of the next 10 year period. Table 5-4: What we plan to do and our levels of service 5.4 Plans Programmed to Meet the Level of Service The list below details any projects, initiatives, programmes or expenditure that the Council is planning to undertake to ensure that the level of service is achieved and/or to address any gaps Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

20 between the targets and current performance. Where there are capital works projects related to improving levels of service (LoS) or maintaining levels of service (Renewal R), these are identified in Section 7. The cyclical programme of maintenance works for the Stewart Island Structures over the term of this AMP will ensure the LOS standards are met. The Stewart Island Structures Review has delivered recommendations for Council consideration Changes to the performance framework The levels of service and key performance indicators have been reviewed following a benefits mapping exercise to ensure Council s performance framework is focussed on measuring the activity benefits at the outcome and objective level. The LoS statements have been consolidated as a result. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

21 6. Managing Future Demand This section describes how demand for water structures is likely to change over the period of the plan, the impact any changes are likely to have and whether the Council is planning to make any changes to the activity as a result. 6.1 Predicting Future Demand for the Service Demand Drivers Demand for the water structures service can be measured in terms of the number of users who make use of the structures. This can currently only be measured by quantifying wharf user fees and wharf and berth leases. The factors influencing demand for our service are summarised in the table below. The Council has prepared corporate wide assumptions/projections for growth drivers (population, land use, dwellings, tourism) which have been used as the basis for assessing future demand for the service. These projections are detailed in the Managing Future Demand section of the Corporate Activity Plan. Demand Driver Changes in the Fishing Industry Tourism Recreational Use 6.2 Demand Forecasts Impact on Future Demand Specifically changes in the demand and processing of wet fish and crayfish from Fiordland (Riverton). Expected increase in visits from tenders from cruise liners if tourism market grows for Stewart Island. Fluctuations in demand (from both this and other demand drivers) will affect the ability to self-sustain the structures due to the financial implications. Table 6-1: Demand Drivers for Water Structures Taking into account the key drivers for this activity above, the information in the Corporate Activity Plan suggests that: There will be static to declining use by the fishing industry. There will be a minor increase in use by the tourism industry given the location of the Riverton assets on the Southern Scenic Route and the associated increase in tourism business on Stewart Island. There will be an increase in recreational use given the predicted 6% increase in Southland s overall population and changes to the fishing industry. As a result of this, we expect demand for the service will increase but not significantly enough to rationalise changes or additions to the existing structures. Similarly the impact of the predicted demand on the structures will be minimal and largely irrelevant. This is further supported by a review of the wharf user fees that have been collected over the past five years, which have remained largely static. It is likely that fees will rise during the term of this AMP, due to the major works on the Stewart Island jetties set out in this AMP and as a result of the outcome of the Riverton Harbour review being undertaken at the time this AMP was being prepared. Wharf fees will continue to be reviewed annually having regard to the number of users and future works programmed. 6.3 Implications of Growth/Demand There is capability in the existing structures to meet the future predicted demand outlined by the demand forecasts. There is minimal risk associated with the forecast demands as the structures are not subject to impact by demand forecasts unless the forecast is greater than +/- 40%. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

22 Changes to demand will be reflected in the funds received for operations/maintenance and capital works (due to the user pays environment), however, no significant risk to the ability to meet the demands of changing capacity is predicted. There is high risk in relation to potential funding sources. 6.4 Demand Management Strategies As the existing facilities have capacity to meet demand at all times, demand management strategies are not currently required. 6.5 Asset Management Strategies to Manage Demand The main commercial use of the Riverton Harbour wharves is for operations associated with the fishing industry. Given that wet fish operate under a quota system it is unlikely that future development of the structures for this industry will be required, specifically as there is no fish processing facility in Riverton. There may be an increase in recreational use as fishermen exit the industry and surplus boats are offered for sale as pleasure craft, however, the existing facilities are adequate to meet this proposed change. Changes in the global economy has not seen significant changes to the use of either Riverton or Stewart Island structures from tourism operators. Indicatively increases in international travel reduce the number of international visitors but increases the number of local tourists. Aside from remedial works required to keep the structures at their current levels of capacity, there is no requirement to upgrade existing assets to meet changes in demand. 6.6 Plans Programmed to Meet Growth/Demand Changes The list below summarises projects, initiatives, programmes or expenditure that the Council is planning to undertake to meet changes in demand (D). Where there are capital works projects related to demand (D), these are identified in Section 7. The Stewart Island Structures Review will identify any growth demand and options/changes from current practices to meet this. These will be considered during the term of this AMP. The ownership of Golden Bay wharf is under discussion, but at the time of writing, had not been finalised. 6.7 Sustainability The Local Government Act 2002 requires local authorities to take a sustainable development approach while conducting its business, taking into account the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, and the efficient and effective delivery of services. At the Water Structures activity level, a sustainable development approach is demonstrated by the following: The Stewart Island Structures Review addressed this aspect for the Stewart Island structures. With the Riverton structures now required to be brought up to an accepted engineering standard. Six yearly inspection will be undertaken to maintain the structures at that standard. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

23 7. District-Wide Asset Management Strategies Lifecycle asset management means considering all asset management options and strategies to deliver the agreed level of service and to inform decision-making for asset renewal, replacement, upgrade and disposal. Effective lifecycle planning is about making the right investment at the right time to ensure that the asset delivers the desired level of service over its full-expected life, at the minimum total cost. This section explains the approach for: Providing new or upgraded assets to improve service levels, providing for growth and demand Operating and maintaining assets Renewing or replacing assets Disposing of assets at the end of their useful life. All asset data has been extracted/reported as at 30 June This section describes the current physical scope, condition and performance of the assets used in the water structures activity. This information is the basis for determining future maintenance and capital programmes, and developing appropriate management strategies. 7.1 Overview of the Water Structures Assets Asset Value and Depreciation The current asset value and depreciation is shown in Table 3-1. Asset Quantity Construction Total Estimated Depreciated Asset Component date Estimated Replacement Value Asset Life Cost (Estimated/Actual) (years) Boat Ramps 2 Various 20 20,869 5,217 Stewart Island T - Wharf Riverton s ,556 87,441 Navigation Aids 5 Various 15 64,000 16,000 estimated Riverton Protective ,332 37,470 estimated Works Riverton (behind Wharves L40- L43) Berths Riverton - Long Wharf and L s ,002 19,095 Boat Ramp s 25 50,170 13,565 Riverton Focal Point Riverton Boat Ramps s ,528, ,940 Waiau Catchment Retaining Wall s 5 69,571 68,007 Pearl Harbour Manapouri Values are estimated due to inaccuracies correlating the asset register with the physical assets and valuations. This will be an area for improvement by way of an asset review to align physical assets with the asset register. Specifically this will involve determining remaining asset life and current asset values. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

24 7.1.2 Asset Condition and Performance The Stewart Island Jetties (five) were obtained in 2009 and are in various states of disrepair due to lack of maintenance by the former owner. Whilst a number of fixes (and in one case total replacement) have been undertaken the general state of the jetties is such that both safety and access issues are prevalent. Structure Overall Use Comments Condition Little Glory Jetty Excellent (new) General access, Replaced in 10/11. tourist operators Fred s Camp Jetty Average General access, Damaged by DOC vessel in early DOC DOC and trampers undertook a temporary fix whilst the Committee undertook repairs in 2014/2015. Ongoing maintenance is scheduled on a 10 yearly basis. Port William Jetty Excellent General access, Jetty was damaged by impact of a large vessel DOC and trampers causing its closure in A new jetty was constructed in 2014/2015 partly funded by a grant from the Stewart Island Visitor Levy Fund. Ongoing maintenance is scheduled on a 10 yearly basis. Ulva Island Jetty Poor General access, tourists, cruise charters, operators, DOC General deterioration of this structure led repairs being undertaken in 2011/2012. Further damage caused by larger vessel(s) required emergency work being undertaken in November This work was considered to extend the life expectancy of this structure until Construction of a replacement jetty is included in this AMP. Miller s Beach Good General Access, The Committee undertook repairs in 2014/2015. Jetty DOC, tourist Ongoing maintenance is scheduled on a 10 yearly operators basis. Boat Ramp Excellent Boat ramp at Halfmoon Bay. (Stewart Island) T-Wharf (Riverton) Good Unloading wharf This includes a loading crane. and deck (Riverton) Navigation Aids Good/Excellent Harbour Two of the five aids have recently been upgraded Riverton Navigation aids in and are in excellent condition. Riverton Harbour Protective Works Excellent Retaining wall No issues. Riverton behind wharves L40-L43 Berths (Long Generally good. Licence Holders Licence for L35 wasn t reissued on expiry due to Wharf & L35) L35 unusable. structure being unsound. Riverton Boat Ramp Excellent General Boating Boat ramp at Koi Koi Park. (Riverton) Public Focal Point Excellent General Riverton Focal Point Viewing Platform. Viewing Platform Public/Tourist Access Boat Ramps - Good General Boating Occasional gravel top ups required around edges. Waiau Catchment Public There will be a time when concrete slabs need replacing. Retaining Wall Pearl Harbour Manapouri Poor Meridian Energy, Commercial Boat Operators General Public Boating Table 7-1: Asset Condition Discussions for repairs/replacement and funding underway with Meridian and commercial boat operators. No funding provisions made in this AMP. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

25 7.1.3 Asset Age and Life Expectancy Refer to Table 7-1 above Data Source and Confidence Data Source Confidence 1 Comments Assumptions Physical Asset Inspections B Monitoring of asset Assets located under the Information and user condition is on an adhoc water are adequate feedback basis. unless evidence is found to the contrary. 1 Source : New Zealand Office of the Controller and Auditor General (OAG) Managing Public Assets June 2013 Table 7-2: Data Source and Confidence 7.2 Approach to Operations and Maintenance The purpose of this section is to outline the broad operations and maintenance philosophies for the assets, understand any underlying issues and trends, and set the basis for the O&M financial forecasts. Day to day oversight of these assets along with the operational and maintenance requirements, rests with the Community Engineers. They arrange for contractors to undertake minor repairs and maintenance, whilst major projects are programmed through the AMP process Service Delivery Review Section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 requires all local authorities to review the costeffectiveness of its current arrangements for delivering good quality local infrastructure, local public services and performance of regulatory functions at least every six years. A Service Delivery Review of these assets is programmed for later in 2017 after this AMP has been prepared Operations and Maintenance Strategy The approach to operations and maintenance has evolved over the years. The Stewart Island Structures Review will however deliver new thinking on this which will be fed into a future strategy Unplanned (Reactive) Operations and Maintenance Strategy Primary operations and maintenance cost drivers have been via the identification of repairs and maintenance by either user feedback or as the result of inspections undertaken by builders, engineers or other suitably qualified persons engaged by the relevant committees. As a result of the reviews of both the Stewart Island Jetties and Riverton Harbour structures, programmed inspections will now happen six yearly to tie in with alternate AMP/LTP reviews. Operations and maintenance practices and standards are determined by relevant legislation (eg Building Code) and/or change in requirements as identified by the respective management/governance boards. Similarly, these boards also prioritise maintenance requirements (reactive or otherwise) and set performance targets Planned (Scheduled) Operations and Maintenance Strategy Condition Assessments Formal Engineering inspections were undertaken in November 2013 (Stewart Island Jetties) and October 2014 (Riverton Harbour Jetties/Structures) with condition assessments provided. Budget for an annual visual assessment and report carried out each year and a more detailed structural inspection every six years has been included in this plan. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

26 Thousands Operations User fees are collected by the SDC for the two respective committees. These funds contribute to the operational and capital funds for the operation and management of the Stewart Island jetties and Riverton wharves. Unfortunately user fees don t cover the full costs of the Stewart Island jetties and that Council will need to investigate third party funding options to ensure the ongoing operation of these structures. This may include applications to the Stewart Island Visitor Levy Fund, but should not be limited to that particular avenue of funding. Riverton structures benefit financially from rentals from Riverton Harbour Board Endowment land leases. Fees collected for berths in Riverton are collected by the Riverton Area Office, whilst leases on endowment land are collected by SDC Property. Maintenance and Capital works are reviewed by the respective committees and contractors are engaged to undertake identified works, either capital or maintenance Operations and Maintenance Trends and Forecasts Historically, operations and maintenance activity has been largely reactive. This is especially true for Stewart Island Jetties as Council only assumed ownership of these assets in Actual costs have fluctuated to undertake work as and when required. Operations, repairs and maintenance costs for Riverton Harbour have shown an upward trend since 2007/08 largely as a result of small projects and inflation increases. The forecast going forward is that approximately $20k has been budgeted every 2 years in order to maintain the Stewart Island Jetties to a safer standard. Future O&M expenditure over the upcoming 10 year period is based on inflationary values. The Stewart Island Structures Review will deliver future costs for those structures. $90 $80 $70 $60 $50 $40 $30 $20 $10 $0 Maintenance Costs Operating Costs Figure 7-1: Water Structures Opex Trends and Forecasts Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

27 7.2.6 Future Improvement The Stewart Island Structures Review and the Riverton Wharves relicensing and requirement for structure upgrades will result in significant improvement of structural standards. This will provide a new base level from which to manage these structures going forward. 7.3 Approach to Renewals Renewal is the replacement (or rehabilitation) if an existing asset without changing its capacity or level of service beyond the original design Renewal Strategy Renewal projects are identified by user feedback or as a result of inspections. Renewals are prioritised by boards who govern the respective assets Renewal Trends and Forecasts Renewal requirements have, over the last few years, increased for the Stewart Island Jetties assets as issues and problems are identified with the structures. Renewal expenditure for Riverton Harbour has remained relatively constant. Forecasts for 10 year renewals have been difficult in the past as they were based on limited historical data, and/or renewals identified in the 2006 inspections. Engineering inspection of the Stewart Island jetties undertaken in 2013 has enabled the necessary ongoing programme of works to be included in this AMP. Repairs undertaken on the Ulva Island Jetty were expected to extend its life for another +/- 10 year. Inspections of the Riverton Harbour structures were undertaken in October 2014, but unfortunately the requirements to bring these up to an acceptable industry standard were not available at the time this AMP was prepared. The necessary programme of works will be developed as part of completing that review. Current renewals are dealt with on an as needed/reactive basis; renewals are currently restricted by limitations in funding. The Stewart Island Visitor Levy Fund will provide a funding option and this proved to be the case with the inaugural meeting of the Fund Committee granting $50,000 towards the Port William jetty replacement (2014/2015). Capital costs of $380,000 are proposed over the next 10 years to upgrade a range of facilities. This includes $300,000 for Ulva Island Jetty Replacement. Funding for 10 yearly maintenance has been provided for all jetties following their most recent repairs and or replacement. This will be part of an annual inspection undertaken by or on behalf of Council and a full inspection on a six yearly basis, as part of alternate AMP reviews. Funding for Waiau amenities upgrades will be in line with Council s funding policy of local i.e. Ward/CB/CDA as the case may be. The large increase in capital expenditure for the Stewart Island Jetties is a result of the capital works undertaken to replace the Little Glory Jetty that was destroyed in September 2007, repairs to the Ulva Island Jetty and replacement of the Port William Jetty in 2014/15.Looking ahead, funding has been secured for the replacement of Ulva Island and Golden Bay continuing over 2 years with the bulk of the work planned for The increase in depreciation is as a result of the replacement rebuilds discussed above. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409

28 Thousands $1,000 $900 $800 $700 $600 $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Renewals Depreciation Future Improvement Figure 7-2: Water Structure Renewal Trends and Forecasts The current renewal strategy of identifying works on an as needed basis will continue. The Riverton assets are already inspected by an electrical engineer (harbour lights etc) and a local builder who examines the wharves and structures. More rigorous inspections have been undertaken in October 2014 as part of a harbour wide review. Inspections of the Stewart Island Jetties in November 2013 provided good information on which to base consideration of future improvements to these structures. Improvements in the renewal assessments will come by way of annual inspections of the structures which will proactively identify works and allow for appropriate measures to be taken (as per Figure 7-3). 7.4 Upgrading and Developing New Assets for Levels of Service and Demand Capital Investment Strategy - Level of Service and Demand A capital Investment strategy is evolving. The Stewart Island Structures Review will provide some direction on this for those structures. The relicensing of the Riverton wharves will require further decisions to be made on continuing council ownership of the decking of the long wharf, wharf L35. Those decisions will then enable consideration of the long-term investment strategy. Waiau Basin structures spending remains O&M. Increasing visitor demand makes capital investment in the Ulva Island jetty essential to cater for those visitors. This jetty will be rebuilt in 2019/2020. Water Structures AMP /15/1/35 & R/17/7/17409