funding mechanism consultation and proposed new treatment ... · part b –funding mechanism...
TRANSCRIPT
Funding Mechanism Consultation
and Proposed new Treatment
Plant
Franz Josef Wastewater – Information Session
Information Session
SCOPE
Introduction and Opening - Mayor Mike Havill
• Part A - Franz Wastewater backgroundVivek Goel – G.M. – District Assets
• Part B - The Funding Mechanism – Current consultationGary Borg – G.M. – Corporate Services
Tanya Winter – Chief Executive
• Part C - Proposed Treatment Solution – SupplementaryInformation
Vivek Goel – G.M. – District Assets
Gary Borg – G.M. – Corporate ServicesJim Ebenhoh – G.M. – Planning, Community and Environment
Introductions and Opening Message
MAYOR MIKE
HAVILL
Part A – Background
The Franz Josef Wastewater Treatment Plant (existing plant) consistsof two oxidation ponds that are intended to discharge treatedeffluent into the Waiho River. The existing plant is owned andoperated by Westland District Council (WDC).
The system was built in 1970’s with the very first discharge consentgranted on 14 November 1977 for a period of 20 years. Consentswere granted under Water and Soil Conservation Act 1967 at thattime.
The consents were then renewed and granted by WCRC inSeptember 2001 for period of 35 years, i.e. a final expiry in 2036.
Another variation to the discharge limits was approved in July 2015to help with the compliance matters.
Franz Josef Wastewater
Franz Josef Wastewater
Some facts Pond 1 (Primary Pond) = area 0.6ha = 6000m2
Pond 2 (Secondary Pond) = area 0.3ha = 3000m2
Base population (for current system) = 600 people
What is required to make the current system work?
An example of a possible layout forthe oxidation ponds.
A Hybrid System with assisteddisinfection including fixed mediaand a covered cell.
Area required: Approx. 4 times +Buffer Zones
Source: SKM report 2009 – Franz Josef performancereview and Upgrade Assessment
The options with oxidation ponds will be further discussed in Part C of this session
2016 Flooding in Franz Josef
Part B – Funding Mechanism
Background and Overview of the proposal
1. Current Ten Year Plan – Project consulted andapproved
2. 2016/17 Annual Plan Process – Project fundingconsulted
3. Current consultation – Funding optionsa) The submissions close on 8 September 2016b) Hearing will be on 14 September 2016
The Project – Long Term Plan
The project is included in the current Long Term Plan(2015-2025).
The cost spread in the LTP is:Financial Year ending Budgets Funding30 June 2017 $2,562,500 Loan: $1.5M
Subsidy/Grant: $1.0M
30 June 2018 $2,562,500 Loan: $1.5M
Subsidy/Grant:$1.0M
30 June 2019 $2,330,600 Loan: $1.0M
Subsidy:$1.3M
30 June 2020 $1,116,000 Loan: $1.1M
30 June 2021 $1,152,000 Loan: $1.1M
The Proposal
Current Consultation
We need to establish whether we have the right method in place to pay for
the new facility.
The options are:OPTION 1: STATUS QUO i.e. Current targeted and harmonised rating system across theDistrict.OPTION 2: 50-50 – i.e. 50% paid by Franz Community and 50% harmonised across theremainder of connections in the districtOPTION 3: 100% paid by Franz Community (This was the previous consulted option inAnnual Plan 2016/17)
Important Note: Council will continue to seek external funding from various sources. Anygrants/contributions received will be incorporated into the above options, which will lessen the netcapital funding requirement from ratepayers.
Funding Options
OPTION 1: STATUS QUO i.e. Current targeted and harmonised rating system across the District.
100% Funded by Westland – No externalContribution
Financial Yearending
LTP Ratesprojection
Revised Ratesprojections
30 June 2018 303 412
30 June 2019 340 409
30 June 2020 364 406
30 June 2021 389 402
30 June 2022 414 399
30 June 2023 410 396
30 June 2024 407 393
30 June 2025 403 390
Funding Options
OPTION 2: 50-50 – i.e. 50% paid by Franz Community and 50% harmonised across the remainder of connections in the district
50% Funded by Westland – 50% Franz CommunityFinancial Year ending LTP Rates projection Revised Rates projections
Rest of Westland
Franz Rates
30 June 2018 303 358 590
30 June 2019 340 356 583
30 June 2020 364 354 576
30 June 2021 389 352 569
30 June 2022 414 350 562
30 June 2023 410 347 554
30 June 2024 407 345 547
30 June 2025 403 343 540
Funding Options
OPTION 3: 100% paid by Franz Community (This was the previous consulted option in
Annual Plan 2016/17)
In this option rest of Westland rates are not affected by the project. The Franz rates are shown below.
100% Funded by Franz Community
Financial Year ending LTP Rates projection Revised Rates projections(Change from LTP)
30 June 2018 303 919
30 June 2019 340 904
30 June 2020 364 890
30 June 2021 389 876
30 June 2022 414 861
30 June 2023 410 847
30 June 2024 407 832
30 June 2025 403 818
Comparison of Option 1,2,3 and LTP
50% Franz-50% Rest
External Funding
• Business Case to Central Government
• The business case has been reviewed and commentedon by LGNZ
• Council’s early discussions indicate the likelihood ofan independent application being accepted is low
• The National Tourism Infrastructure Fund has beencreated and Council has been directed to this fund
• Region wide affordability and comparatives will beconsidered by government.
Comparison with neighbours
District Average rate per property
(2016/17 Annual Plan)
Buller District
(Westport – Residential with 1-2connections)
$820.00
Greymouth District (Greymouth Town) $639.60Southland District
(Harmonised)
$364.97
Westland District
(Harmonised throughout)
$261.70
External Funding
• National Tourism Infrastructure Fund
• The government has released the criteria for this fund. Westland will submit and make applications to this fund.
• This work is now in progress.
• Discussions with stakeholders
• Initial discussions have commenced with stakeholders.• Proposals are commercially sensitive.• Any contribution will reduce the capital requirement on the
project
Part C - Proposed Solution – Supplementary Information
SCOPE
1. Continue on background from Part A
2. Timeline to date include non-compliance history
3. The solutions considered – including estimates
4. The proposed location
5. Environmental Effects and mitigation
Timeline – Franz WWTP
Treatment Options available
In Theory – 3 Forms of treatment can be applied depending on the desired outcomes.
1. Primary Treatment 2. Secondary Treatment 3. Tertiary or advanced Treatment
As identified on the timeline – WDC Staff has applied and tested possible economical solutions.
These include a range of options including assessments on introduction of mechanical aeration, floating media treatments, expansion at the current site and also possible engineered stop banks to lower the risks associated with Waiho River.
Expansion of current WWTP site
In 2009 – WDC commissioned investigations to assess the current WWTP site.
At that time the projections related to Franz Josef were estimated as:
The above estimates assumed to be around 2031 are well passed in the year 2012.
Expansion of current WWTP site
Based on then data – SKM suggested a staged upgrade to the existing oxidations ponds
Expansion of current WWTP site
Expansion of current WWTP site
Expansion of current WWTP site
Expansion of current WWTP site
Expansion of current WWTP site
The Expected Effluent Quality is based on then 2031 demand projections
Cost estimates – Option 3 - 2009
Current Costs in 2016/17
OPUS consultants have reviewed the reports and estimate the comparisons as below
Alternatives considered – 2012/13
With the same challenge as on date – take the cheapest option available, Council staff investigated further options available.
It was suggested that a secondary treatment introduction will be cheap and affordable and can possibly produce results as desired.
Floating media treatments were proposed and implemented . The solution failed. Costs – approximately $250k.
The solution was estimated close to $350k, however stage 2 was not completed as the technology did not produce the desired outcome.
Floating Media Treatments
Infiltration Gallery Issues
Solution : A Tertiary Treatment Plant
Based on the research and costings undertaken to date:• A High Rate Wastewater Treatment Process Plant
Following to be considered in the design:• Visual buffering• Noise• Odour• Ability of plant to handle future growth and• Ability to handle variable flows
Please refer Appendix 1 A of the proposal.
OPUS – Site Assessments
Waiho River future
The Proposed Site
The Proposed Site
The Proposed Site
Other Planning Matters
Like any Wastewater Treatment process, the plants will have to be designed carefully to address the following concerns: • Noise • Odour/Smell• Visual effects
All above factors have been taken into consideration while providing the scope of the plant to the proposers. These have been addressed in Appendix 1B of the proposal.
Consenting Process
• Land Use consent from WDC• Current discharge consents review and possible variations for
discharge point
The process to date
• Nov/Dec 2015 – Design Investigations commenced –Budget $150k.
• Best Value for money – Design and Build Option• 5 experienced companies selected for providing the
solution. – OPUS and WDC• Probity Auditor appointed• Procurement guidelines in accordance with MBIE and
SOLGM good practice.
• Refer to Appendix 1D of the proposal.
Environment Court Proceedings
• On 6 August 2015, WCRC made an application for Enforcement Orderpursuant to Section 316 of the Resource Management Act 1991.
• Council has since been in discussions and in mediation with WCRC. Theproceedings have been on hold since based on assurances from WDC.
• As per the last report submitted on 30 June 2016, Environment courts haveindicated, no further extension will be granted beyond 7 October 2016.
• As per our legal advise this is a serious situation and a decision is required byCouncil in this matter. A copy of the legal advice is now available on Councilwebsite as supplementary information to the consultation Proposal.
Franz Josef Wastewater
QUESTIONS ?