Contact
Newsagent
Login
Council wants ideas for saving water; “we need feedback,” says Cr Wade-Brown
Media release – Wellington City Council
A free, council-backed plumbing service, installation of grey water and rainwater collection systems, grants or subsidies to help pay for low-flow toilets or shower heads – and encouraging drought-resistant plants.
These are some of the ideas and concepts that are being floated by the Wellington City Council with the aim of saving the region’s precious water. Wellingtonians face a number of big issues about water usage.
So from this week until 15 October, the City Council is seeking people’s views about measures we should collectively take to keep water demand at a sustainable level – and to avoid the need for big spending on more drastic conservation measures like water meters or building a new regional storage dam in the near future.
The City Council’s Environment Portfolio Leader, Councillor Celia Wade-Brown, says City Councillors have approved a draft water conservation and efficiency plan – with a range of ideas and discussion points on how we can collectively conserve water or use it more efficiently.
“There are a whole lot of ‘carrot-and-stick’ ideas – ranging from grants and subsidies to help purchase new and efficient equipment, through to law changes to compel property owners to install rainwater tanks, to discussions about bans on various types of water use during severe droughts. Earlier this year, City Councillors unanimously agreed to aim to live within our limits and stabilise water use. Our first step is to find out how businesses, schools, households and the Council itself can best do that – so we need broad public feedback.
“The Council has already reduced leakage and other unaccounted-for usage in the past few years from an estimated 26% in 2004 to 16% through detection and repair of leaks and the installation of area meters which show where there is higher than expected night usage. Does the public agree that there is scope for more investment in this area?
“Every litre of water wasted wastes energy for pumping and chemicals for treatment. However the majority of costs are fixed – so saving water doesn’t always save as much money as we might hope. Therefore we must choose cost-effective and attractive options first. We are also interested in exploring initiatives with other benefits such as energy savings or emergency resilience.”
A summary of the plan will be available at Council libraries and at the City Service Centre in Wakefield Street.
More detailed information is available in the draft plan discussion document. These are available:
· by post and email – phone 910 3800 or email waterconservation@capacity.net.nz
· on-line in the public input section of our website – www.wellington.govt.nz
We will also hold public meetings to present the plan’s outline and answer questions at the following locations:
* Central Library (mezzanine floor), Victoria Street, Friday 17 September, 1-2pm, Saturday 25 September, 12-1pm
* Ruth Gotlieb Library, Kilbirnie Cres, Monday 20 September, 12-1pm, 6-7pm
* Karori Library, Karori Road, Tuesday 21 September, 12-1pm
* Karori Community Centre, Beauchamp Street, Tuesday 21 September, 6.30-7.30pm
* Johnsonville Community Centre, Frankmoore Avenue, Monday 4 October, 7-8pm.
Submissions are required by 5pm on Friday 15 October – go to www.wellington.govt.nz if you want to do it online.
A petition by the Wellington Residents Coalition now stands at 15.000+ signatures demanding “No water meters”.
Why does Local Government think they must DO everything? If there was a little goodwill and intent to properly engage with ratepayers, then I’m sure we could all come to an agreement where community groups take the lead in getting roofwater tanks and reticulation into homes. The willingness is out there… please Wellington City Council, stop making a martyr of yourselves by attempting to be the only game in town. Public-Community partnerships have shown huge social and economic benefits overseas… let’s see some vision in Wellington City!
How about we spend the $140+ million being proposed for light rail, and increase our water supply. Problem solved. The amount of effort and cost invested in policing and administering piece-meal deferment of the inevitable would be better spent addressing the issue and minimising the risk of not having an adequate water supply. Grey water and leakage need our attention, but we should have been building towards a solution ages ago. Council need to stop wasting our money on parties, rugby monuments, and Manners Mall re-routing, and start focusing on the important stuff. We’re heading rapidly heading towards a water crisis and the council has wasted the last 3 years sticking its head in the sand – until it’s confronted with the issue pre-election.
Maria – WCC is not proposing meters. We are interested in the community’s further ideas (some already contributed to the draft) in how schools, business, households and Council can do so.
Grange – very happy to have suggestions for community partnerships for initiatives. We work with the Sustainability Trust on some worthwhile projects including house insulation and curtain banks. Please add your ideas and I agree that Council doesn’t have to do everything – we didn’t mean to imply it did. Have a look at the discussion document and see what you think.
Mark – the discussion document looks at the benefit of deferring that investment in a dam and it’s considerable – several million a year. If you think we have the calculations wrong, please let us know in the submission.
If we don’t look at light rail and other public transport investment, the roading costs will be even higher. Demand management for transport infrastructure (public transport replacing some car trips, walking, cycling, working from home, flexi-time, combining trips) and water (efficient shower heads, drought-resistant planting, less frequent car washing, fixing dripping taps) can be more cost-effective and less environmentally damaging than new infrastructure that says “drive as much as you like” (more road tunnels and flyover) or “pour it on” (dam a charming little river – the Whakatikei and reduce Hutt River flows). Both transport and water infrastructure needs some investment but whether increased capacity for business as usual is the way to go, let’s hear what people think!
Celia, your last sentence qualifies your bottom line as investment. In 2007, Mana Coach Services submitted to Council that closing the right hand vehicle turn from Victoria Street into Manners Street would make a significant difference releasing bus congestion at almost zero cost. The congestion is in the Opus Report as a primary reason leading to the revocation of Manners Mall’s pedestrian status. Council ignored a simple physical test of the bus operator’s solution and instead approved an $11.1million package to improve public transport through the central city. With road works nearly all the way through Manners Mall, the citizens have been denied the right of a zero cost solution.
These are deferment initiatives at the ratepayers’ expense. It might save the council’s bottom line, but the cost is just shifted to the ratepayer (assuming they can afford it). Why should we pay twice – once for shower heads and water police fines [http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/3811382/Council-warns-Wellington-of-fines-by-water-police] (our expense) and then again for a dam (our rates)? Are council discounting the cost to the public in these “savings” calculations? And as I said before, if council stopped wasting money on stuff like Manners Mall, we could have had the “several million” to fund a water solution some time ago. Seems council is more interested in constraining consumption and rolling out meters. They are already being trialled in Wellington and the Hutt – but you knew that. [http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/hutt-news/3888598/Household-water-meter-trial-approved-for-Wellington-region]. It’s about priorities, and this council seems unable to grapple with them sensibly. This is another issue that the council is kicking to touch until after the election (encroachments is another). And like the Manners Mall debacle (74% of 722 submissions opposed it), I doubt the public will be heard. I can already hear the yellow fever chant, “same old council. always …” It’s time for change.
Before Regional Council and WCC start their campaign to make gutter storage containers or water meters (or both) mandatory, may I suggest both start an intensive audit of water wastage via leaking water mains/pipes throughout their areas of control. All too often, thousands of water litres are pouring out of defective pipework throughout the Wellington region and I’ve known of such wastage taking over seven days before rectification is effected, despite numerous phone calls to the appropriate authority. No doubt my suggestion will fall on the usual deaf ears.
Benjamin – I know you care passionately about Manners Mall (even if the rest of us are shrugging our shoulders and getting on with our lives), but does every single comment you make on wellington.scoop have to keep banging the same drum? Surely there are other issues in the city that need to be addressed. And with all due respect, the sort of money that is being talked about for a new dam is an order of magnitude larger than the $11 million for Manners Mall, so I would have thought that the debate needs to move on – personally, I would far prefer to debate the merits of rainwater tanks vs dams, as this will have a much bigger impact on my rates than continuing a dead discussion about Manners Mall.
Did anyone see the “water for all” advertising during the Silver Ferns telecast on TVOne tonight? What was the point? Was this a WCC campaign?
John, my platform is not Manners Mall. The mall fiasco displays public acceptance of a substandard democracy, supporting a low political priority for health, safety and community with an open neglect in political accountability. For example, the only recorded explanation why the mall was established heralded a reduction in accidents and freeing up of congestion. At that time there were fewer people and buses were shorter and narrower. Unbelievably these facts have imprinted no recognition that we are putting in place a transport disaster, though the road width remains the same. If I was interested in the different issues, I would have stood for council in an attempt to draw a salary. Instead I am homeless pleading to the public that Wellington has an emergency and is facing an unprecedented disaster. None appear to be listening.
Sorry Benjamin, but Manners Mall was a compensation for the urban motorway in the sixties.
My biggest question would be: if Celia becomes Mayor and pushes for light rail, where’s the money going to come from? The WCC is underfunded, under budget and broke with a deficit of NZD300M and growing. I want light rail but I want a city council that can manage their finances first and promote businesses so that everyone can have jobs. JOBS and ECONOMY for Wellingtonians first before flights of fancy!
There’s currently about $250m allocated for new transport projects over the period 2009/12 in the Wellington region plus another $400m+ for SH1 in Wellington city in subsequent years: all of the state highway funding is provided by NZTA, plus a fair proportion of the rest. So there’s a lot of money planned to be spent on transport in Wellington.
To my mind , a significant question is whether this money is being spent well, or could have greater benefits spent in other ways. Expenditure on public transport in general and light rail in particular has been demonstrated to generate jobs and boost the economy, often more so than for roads (particularly with low benefit/cost ratio roading like the Wellington state highway projects).
So in a rational, sensible world a portion of state highway expenditure would be redirected to a modern tram system linking the airport through to the region’s rail network, with the major benefits that that would bring to all parts of the city. What the newly refreshed (I hope!) city council will be doing is to lobby the government for that sort of change of direction – that will be a good deal for ratepayers.
Mike Mellor
Independent candidate for WCC Eastern Ward
Hi Mike: Agree with your rationale for diverting funds to light rail. However, there is not a chance of this happening without significant cultural and structural reform within the agencies that are currently responsible for funding public transport infrastrcuture.
A starting point must be for:
a) better alignment, if not integration of transport agencies;
b) a more integrated approach to public transport planning and funding; and
c) greater discretion to agencies to identify and fund a broad range of transport infrastructure on a cost-benefit basis (i.e. not being straight jacketed to tar seal).
Without these types of structural changes I suggest that projects like light rail, if indeed they stack-up, are a long way away.
Daran Ponter
Candidate for Wellington Regional Council 2010