I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 11 December 2013

1:00pm

Reception Lounge, Level 2
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

 

 

Cr Ross Clow

 

 

Cr Chris Darby

 

 

Cr Hon Chris Fletcher, QSO

 

 

Cr Mike Lee

 

 

Member Liane Ngamane

 

 

Cr John Watson

 

 

Member Karen Wilson

 

Ex-officio

Mayor Len Brown, JP

 

 

Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse

 

Independent Maori Statutory Board (alternative)

Member David Taipari

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

Crispian Franklin

Democracy Advisor

 

5 December 2013

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 373 6205

Email: crispian.franklin@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

TERMS OF REFERENCE

 

 

Areas of Activity

 

·         Management and monitoring of Auckland’s bio-diversity and eco-systems including natural hazards

·         Sustainability frameworks for natural resource management

·         Projects and programmes to deliver on energy management and climate change targets

·         Environmental initiatives including coastal and freshwater management

·         Environmental and climate change impacts of waste management

·         Facilitating partnerships and collaborative funding models to support environmental initiatives

 

Responsibilities

 

Within the specified area of activity the Committee is responsible for:

 

·         In accordance with the work programme agreed with the parent committee, developing strategy and policy, including any agreed community consultation, to recommend to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

·         Acting as a community interface for consultation on policies and as a forum for raising community concerns, while ensuring community engagement is complementary to that undertaken by local boards

·         Making decisions within delegated powers

 

Powers

 

All powers necessary to perform the Committee’s responsibilities

 

Except:

 

(a)     powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (see Governing Body responsibilities)

(b)     where the Committee’s responsibility is limited to making a recommendation only

(c)     where a matter is the responsibility of another committee or a local board

(d)     the approval of expenditure that is not contained within approved budgets

(e)     the approval of expenditure of more than $2 million

(f)      the approval of final policy

(g)     deciding significant matters for which there is high public interest and which are controversial

(h)     the commissioning of reports on new policy where that policy programme of work has not been approved by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee

 

 

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          5  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    5

5.1     Council's Biodiversity Policies                                                                           5

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          5

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                5

8          Notices of Motion                                                                                                          6

9          Committee Introduction and Overview                                                                       7

10        Update on Environment Strategic Action Plan – Project Planning and Approach 17

11        Appeal to the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan                                        23

12        Auckland Council Submission to the Department of Conservation on: Proposed variation to the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary; and Brief Review of Maui’s Dolphin Threats Management Plan Decision                                                           53

13        Appointments to Ark in the Park Governance Group                                             73

14        2013 Environmental Initiatives Fund Allocation                                                      75

15        October 2013 Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund Overview                    297  

16        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

17        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               311

C1       October 2013 Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund allocation of grants   311  

 


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

2          Declaration of Interest

 

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

4          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

5          Public Input

 

Standing Order 3.21 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

 

5.1       Council's Biodiversity Policies – Mike Brennan

Purpose

Mike Brennan will speaking to the Committee regarding the review of methods used in implementing Council’s biodiversity policies.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      thank Mr Mike Brennan for his presentation regarding Council’s Bio-diversity  policies.

 

 

 

6          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 3.22 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give two (2) days notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

 

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the agenda.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

 

7          Extraordinary Business

 

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

 

(a)        The local  authority by resolution so decides; and

 

(b)        The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

 

(i)         The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

 

(ii)        The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

 

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

 

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

 

(a)        That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

 

(i)         That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

 

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

 

(b)        no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

8          Notices of Motion

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Committee Introduction and Overview

 

File No.: CP2013/27525

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To introduce the Environment Climate Change and Natural Heritage Reporting Committee to the respective work streams that will report to it in this triennial and to and foreshadow any upcoming decision items for the committee’s consideration.

Executive Summary

2.       The Environment Climate Change and Natural Heritage Reporting Committee (committee) has delegated responsibility for a number of areas of activity as detailed in their terms of reference and the discussion section of this report.

3.       A number of Auckland Council departments, units and teams have responsibility for the areas of activity that sit with this committee including research, strategy, policy, planning and operations. This report introduces the committee to these teams and foreshadows any items which will be in the committee’s work programme.

 

Recommendation

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      receive the committee overview and introduction report.

 

 

Discussion

4.       The Environment Climate Change and Natural Heritage Reporting Committee (committee) has responsibility for the following areas of activity:

management and monitoring of Auckland’s bio-diversity and eco-systems including natural hazards;

sustainability frameworks for natural resource management;

projects and programmes to deliver on energy management and climate change targets;

environmental initiatives including coastal and freshwater management;

environmental and climate change impacts of waste management;

facilitating partnerships and collaborative funding models to support environmental initiatives.

5.       Within these areas of activity the committee is responsible for:

developing strategy and policy, including any agreed community consultation, to recommend to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee;

acting as a community interface for consultation on policies;

acting as a forum for raising community concerns, while ensuring community engagement is complementary to that undertaken by local boards, and;

making decisions within its delegated powers as detailed in Auckland Council’s governing body terms of reference

6.       The Auckland Plan describes a transformational shift to ‘strongly commit to environmental action and green growth’.  Giving effect to this shift and the related environmental, climate change targets and action points to create the world’s most liveable city involves working with multiple entities, for multiple outcomes and benefits as described in the diagram below:

Figure One: Transformational Shift Two environmental outcomes and Key Benefits from strongly committing to environmental action and green growth

7.       The environmental and broader cultural, economic and community outcomes arising from the transformational shift are noted below.

Improved Environmental Outcomes

 

Maori Outcomes

 

Economic Development

Community Wellbeing

·      Thriving ecosystems

·      No indigenous species loss

·      Treasured coastlines

·      Clean harbours and waterways

·      Excellent air quality

·      Sustainable land management

·      Low impact stormwater management

·      Zero waste to landfill

·      Energy conservation

·      Low carbon environment

 

·   Mauri is optimum health

·   Matauranga Maori is used  and respected

·   Tangata Whenua are
empowered as kaitiaki

 

·   Green Jobs

·   Green technology development

·   Sustainable green infrastructure

·   Primary Production

·   Ecotourism

 

·   Improved human health

·   Increased options for nature based outdoor recreation

·   Environmental amenity

·   Engaged and strengthened communities

·   Intergenerational change

·   Warmer, drier, and more energy efficient homes

 

Table One: Multiple outcomes from ‘strongly committing to environmental action and green growth’

8.       The committee’s areas and responsibilities mean it will play a key role in providing both political guidance, kaitiakitanga and decision making over the activities which both give effect to this transformational shift and fall within the committee’s delegated responsibilities.

9.       A number of Auckland Council departments, units and teams have responsibility for the areas of activity that sit with this committee including those of research, strategy, policy and planning and operations. This activity is detailed below including any upcoming decisions of key areas of work for the committee.

10.     In addition to the detail below each unit will provide a short presentation at the committee meeting to illustrate the key issues and work programmes as relevant to the committee.

Auckland Energy Resilience and Low Carbon Action Plan

11.     Auckland’s vision is to be the world’s most liveable city. Energy resilience and reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are critical to achieving that vision.  The draft Auckland Energy Resilience and Low Carbon Action Plan (entitled ‘Low Carbon Auckland’) sets out a 30 year pathway and 10 year plan of action that will guide the first stage of Auckland’s transformation towards an energy resilient future and deliver on the Auckland Plan’s aspirational target to achieve a 40 per cent reduction in GHG emissions by 2040 (based on 1990 levels).

12.     Low Carbon Auckland is part of the council’s agreed Strategy and Policy Forward Programme which falls within the delegated responsibilities of the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee. It has been developed in collaboration with over 180 organisations. Auckland’s unique cultural heritage and the principles of Kaitiakitanga are integral to the plan.  This input has been facilitated through a Māori working group which has identified issues, opportunity areas and priority actions for Māori.  

13.     The proposed draft Action Plan will be discussed with councillors and local board representatives at a workshop on 12 December 2013.  Endorsement of the draft Action Plan for the purpose of public feedback in March will be sought on 4 February 2014.  Council adoption of the finalised action plan is due in May 2014.

Natural Heritage – Environmental Strategy and Policy

14.     Auckland Council has signalled a commitment to environmental action and green growth in its Auckland Plan. Protection and enhancement of our natural heritage is fundamental to achieving this.

15.     The natural heritage team within the environmental strategy and policy department provides advice on strategic and policy matters relating to natural heritage, principally biodiversity, but including other natural heritage areas such as natural features and trees. The team works with our operational colleagues in Infrastructure & Environmental Services and with all other parts of the organisation where environmental outcomes can be achieved. Key work areas to date include:

·        playing a key role in the development of the Significant Ecological Areas, Outstanding Natural Features, Vegetation Management and Notable Tree provisions and ecological input to the extent of the Rural Urban Boundary Greenfield Investigation Areas of the Unitary Plan;

·        development of the Council’s Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy;

·        provided advice to other Council initiatives, particularly planning initiatives (e.g. Te Arai Plan Change, MMEWS, Puhoi to Warkworth Motorway), relevant legislative amendments and other policy and strategy development (e.g. Weed Management Policy, Dog Bylaw, Freshwater Management);

·        Involvement in several national initiatives, including the development of guidance for the National Policy Direction on Biosecurity (a new requirement of the Biosecurity Act) and BioManagers (an inter-regional grouping to promote coordination on Biosecurity and Biodiversity).

 

16.     In collaboration with our Council colleagues, the following items are likely to be reported to the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Reporting Committee; through this triennial;

·        review of the Regional Pest Management Plan – Council’s key strategic and regulatory document for managing unwanted organisms and pests, including Kauri dieback;

·        progress of the Council’s appeal of the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan (primarily as it relates to the Hunua Ranges)

·        development of a recommended policy approach to incentivising natural and historic heritage management and to support regulatory provisions, particularly the Unitary Plan;

·        promoting Auckland’s Urban Forest (in light of restrictions in the RMA against many of the regulatory provisions used in the past).

·        implementation of Council’s Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy (in association with the Biodiversity Group, within Infrastructure & Environmental Services).

 

Air, Land, Water and Coastal - Environmental Strategy and Policy

17.     The Air, Land Water and Coastal Unit (CLAW) within the Environmental Strategy and Policy Department leads the development of natural environmental strategy and policy with special regard to air, land freshwater and marine environments.  The major projects and key priorities are summarised as follows:

18.     The Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan project, branded as Sea Change, was officially launched on 9 September 2013.  A ‘stakeholder working group’ is at the heart of the project, and will follow a collaborative process to produce a plan for a healthy, productive and sustainable future for the Hauraki Gulf (Tikapa Moana, Te Moananui ā Toi).  The stakeholder working group is being established through a series of forums, and an ‘independent chair’ for the group has been appointed.  A ‘project steering group’ involving a partnership between mana whenua, Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, territorial authorities in the catchment, the Department of Conservation, the Ministry for Primary Industries and the Hauraki Gulf Forum, has met three times, and will ultimately approve the marine spatial plan and endorse it for implementation by the parent agencies.  Auckland Council representatives are councillors Penny Webster (PSG co-chair) and Mike Lee.  A ‘project team’ of partner agency officers is developing and supporting the operation of the project.  Further information on the project background, and the opportunity to register interest and obtain updates, can be found on www.seachange.org.nz.

19.     Wai Ora Wai Maori Tamaki Makaurau is Auckland’s freshwater programme.  It gives effect to directives 7.8, 7.9 and 7.10 of the Auckland Plan and includes planning how Auckland can give effect to the government’s National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management.  This programme is concerned with improving management of freshwater across New Zealand, both quantity and quality.  It incorporates a second project within the LTP, the Freshwater Inventory that will enhance our record of freshwater resources in the region.

20.     Water Strategic Action Plan also responds to a directive of the Auckland Plan and is an item on Auckland Council’s forward strategy programme.  The strategic action plan relates to the provision of water services and integrated management across catchments.  It is also the vehicle to address the issue of fluoride in drinking water in Auckland.

21.     Environmental Strategic Action Plan is an environmental plank of Auckland Council’s strategy and policy forward programme.  The purpose is to identify and prioritise actions to achieve positive environmental outcomes for Auckland.  The aim is to deliver greater efficiency and effectiveness through strategically prioritised actions, a strong commitment to environmental action and green growth through using environmental asset management and to articulate environmental challenges faced by Auckland as a baseline for strategic action.

22.     The Natural Hazard Risk Management Action Plan (NHRMAP) will introduce a coordinated, risk based approach to the way we manage natural hazards in Auckland Council.  The project will identify and prioritise what actions Auckland Council staff need to undertake to make sure we are managing risks effectively, ultimately reducing the risk to Auckland communities.  It is due to be completed by the end of 2015.

23.     Sediment is a widespread problem globally and a significant issue in Auckland and, as a response, a Sediment Management Action Plan (SMAP) is being developed.  A primary driver of the SMAP is the Auckland Plan target to “reduce the overall yield of suspended sediment to priority marine receiving environments from 2012 levels by 15% by 2014”. Outputs of this action plan will also contribute to other CLAW projects.

24.     The Auckland Council is responsible for managing air quality and exposure to poor air quality in the Auckland Region.  The main sources of air pollution include transport (throughout the year), domestic heating in winter time and industry. The Auckland Plan sets direction for reducing those emissions.  Industrial emissions are managed through the Unitary Plan which now includes improved provisions for separating industry from sensitive activities and improved rules for some industrial processes (combustion sources, emitters of volatile organic compounds and coffee roasting).  Separation of childcare centres from major transport routes is also included in the proposed Unitary Plan. Together with the Unitary Plan evidence, work in the coming year will include the domestic heating bylaw (to replace the rules in the regional plan), investigating how emissions from ships could be managed and further work on other transport emissions.

Infrastructure and Environmental Services - Operations

25.     It is the responsibility of the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department (I&ES) to support the transformational shift (strongly commit to environmental action and green growth through the development, promotion and implementation of projects that deliver improved environmental and sustainability outcomes.

26.     The environmental services, stormwater, solid waste and chief engineer’s units all sit within the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Department. These operational units deliver programmes, projects and technical advisory services that contribute to the protection, conservation and enhancement of the region’s natural, built and cultural resources. Its common purpose is to deliver effective infrastructure and environmental outcomes to support making Auckland’s the world’s most liveable city through five main priorities:

1.   A healthy environment supporting our cultural, economic and community wellbeing.

2.   A zero waste future for Auckland.

3.   Pristine waterways and harbours through water sensitive design.

4.   Thriving ecosystems and

5.   Empowered, sustainable communities.

 

27.     The three main operational units of stormwater, solid waste and environmental services are summarized below alongside the expected work programmes the committee will consider.

Environmental Services

28.     The Auckland Plan describes a transformational shift to ‘strongly commit to environmental action and green growth’.  It is the responsibility of the environmental services unit to support that shift through it operational actions including the development, promotion and implementation of projects that deliver improved environmental outcomes.

29.     Improving freshwater quality is a key focus for environmental services and is supported through the implementation of catchment-based restoration projects (such as the Sustainable Catchments Programme and Project Twin Streams), land management programmes, and community education initiatives such as Wai Care.

30.     The vision of Auckland Council’s Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy is to ensure that Auckland’s biodiversity is flourishing and treasured. In supporting this vision, as well as that of the Auckland Plan, the biodiversity team provide technical advice to ecological restoration projects being delivered by either Council or private landowners. Biodiversity staff also provide technical input into the evaluation of resource consent applications and other statutory processes, such as the development of the draft unitary plan. 

31.     Biosecurity works alongside biodiversity to contribute to environmental outcomes. It is responsible for the implementation of the Regional Pest Management Plan through a number of operational programmes, and is also responsible for the regional coordination of national biosecurity management programmes, such as the local response to kauri dieback and kiwifruit vine disease (PSA).

32.     The environmental services unit also delivers a number of projects through a community development approach by engaging communities in environment and sustainability projects.  These projects include Wai Care, Enviroschools and Trees for Survival for example.  In addition, the unit is currently developing and trialling a number of household sustainability initiatives in various local board areas.

Solid Waste

33.     The solid waste unit is responsible for the management of the region’s kerbside domestic refuse, recycling, hazardous waste, inorganics, illegal dumping and litter collection. It also manages some transfer stations, and develops and delivers waste minimisation programmes. It is made up of four main operational delivery groups; Waste Planning, Waste Minimisation, Waste Operations and Waste Infrastructure and Assets.

34.     The Waste Planning team is responsible for carrying out implementation planning for the delivery of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) and ensuring our waste operations and plans are consistent with regional waste bylaws and national level waste legislation. They advocate council views to central government on waste issues.

35.     The Waste Planning team is also responsible for delivery of the Resource Recovery Network (RRN). The RRN is a key initiative of the WMMP and for the delivery of Council’s aspirational goal of zero waste. The RRN will maximise the diversion of reusable ad recyclable material for landfill and help generate multiple environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits, such as local job creation and community involvement.

36.     The Waste Minimisation team is responsible for the development, management and delivery of waste minimisation behaviour change and education programmes to households, businesses, and schools. This includes programmes such as the Create Your Own Eden composting courses and WasteWise schools.

37.     The Waste Operations team is responsible for the management of the region’s kerbside domestic refuse, recycling and inorganic waste collection services, servicing and maintaining public litter bins and loose litter cleaning.

38.     The Waste Assets and Infrastructure team is responsible for providing the infrastructure which ensures Auckland meets its obligations under the Waste Management Act for the safe and efficient recovery, recycling and disposal of waste across the region.

39.     These infrastructure requirements are managed in many ways. For example, through direct service supply contracts for delivery of waste to landfill, Build Operate Own and Transfer contracts for facilities to process recycling, and through council-owned assets and operations such as those at the Waitakere Transfer Station in Henderson and the Claris Landfill on Great Barrier Island. In addition, the team also procures and manages the stock of refuse and recycling bins and public litter bins. Finally, they work with suppliers to make provision for hazardous waste drop off, recovery and disposal.

40.     The Regional Strategy and Policy Committee has delegated responsibility for oversight of the WMMP with decision making over the Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund sitting with this committee. A close working relationship between the parent committee and this committee in regards to implementation of the WMMP is expected as the respective work programmes are developed.

 

 

Stormwater

41.     Auckland Council is largely responsible for two of the stormwater activities outlined in the 2010 amendment of the Local Government Act 2002: stormwater drainage, and flood protection and control.  In sum council operates and maintains an extensive stormwater network comprising 6,000 km of pipes, 10,000 km of streams, 140,000 manholes, and 370 ponds and wetlands.

42.     To maintain the stormwater network and achieve flood protection and control the stormwater unit is managing the delivery of a number of works over the period of the Long Term Plan (LTP) and beyond. A number of these projects are multiyear projects which broadly address four main drivers:  asset renewal, growth, flooding, and the environment. The 2013/14 stormwater capital expenditure budget is $64 million. In addition a further $75 million (approximately) is likely to be delivered through third party developers.

43.     Auckland Council Stormwater activity is guided by the two main operational documents; the stormwater strategic direction and the 2012-2032 stormwater asset management plan (SWAMP).

44.     To contribute to council’s vision to become the world’s most liveable city stormwater activity is focused around a sub-vision to achieve a water sensitive community. This vision is guided by six main objectives as detailed in figure one below.

Figure 1: Stormwater Strategic objectives to achieve a water sensitive community

45.     Stormwater infrastructure is the delegated responsibility of the Infrastructure Committee of Auckland Council. A report has been sent to the December meeting of the infrastructure committee providing an overview of stormwater infrastructure objectives.

46.     It is expected that stormwater initiatives, strategies and plan that relate to the environmental objectives of this committee will be presented to the committee for consideration and approval as they are developed including those of low impact stormwater design solutions and healthy connected waterways.

Consideration

Local Board Views

47.     Responsibility for the decision making of regional environmental activities sits with the governing body and the respective committees.  There are also shared goals between local boards and the governing body in regards to environmental, climate change and natural heritage outcomes.

48.     A number of local boards have aspirations and identified actions to support biodiversity, sustainability, low carbon action, clean waterways and green growth within their local board areas. Operational departments of council such as Infrastructure & Environmental Services report to the local boards on a quarterly basis and work closely with the boards on the development and delivery of their environmental budgets and objectives.

49.     Local boards also provide and will continue to provide, input into regional decision making in regards to development of regional environmental strategies and policies. For example they have recently provided key feedback on the proposed changes to the waste controls under the solid waste bylaw and the Waitemata Harbour network discharge consent process for example. The proposed draft low carbon action plan will be discussed with councillors and local board representatives at a workshop on 12 December 2013.

Maori Impact Statement

50.     This is a report for information only and therefore does not have direct impact on Maori. However the activities discussed in this report can and do have a direct impact in enabling Maori outcomes especially those of kaitiakitanga, mauri, and matauranga Maori. For example activities which aim to improve water quality and environmental management (e.g. riparian enhancement) have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga. Some of the activities detailed in this report council has, and will continue to, work with both Mana Whenua and Mataa Waka in the development and delivery of our shared outcomes for the environment.

General

51.     The activities detailed within this report are within the delegations of this committee.

Implementation Issues

52.     There are no known or additional implementation issues arising for the activities detailed in this report.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Chris Hatton, Manager Air Land Water Coastal, Environmental Strategy & Policy

Noel Reardon, Manager Heritage, Environmental Strategy and Policy

Denise O'Shaughnessy Manager Strategic Advice, Auckland Strategy and Research

Gael Ogilvie, Manager Environmental Services, Infrastructure & Environmental Services

Craig Mcilroy, Manager Stormwater, Infrastructure & Environmental Services

Ian Stupple, Manager Solid Waste, Infrastructure & Environmental Services

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy & Policy Manager

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Update on Environment Strategic Action Plan – Project Planning and Approach

 

File No.: CP2013/27472

 

  

 

Purpose

1.    This report will update the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee on the proposed scope and engagement approach for the Environment Strategic Action Plan (ESAP).

Executive Summary

2.   ESAP will establish a “line of sight” between environmental actions and the Auckland Plan.  The primary Auckland Plan outcome area within the ESAP scope is “a green Auckland”.  Other outcomes that ESAP will contribute to are “a beautiful Auckland that is loved by its people” and “a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”.  ESAP is delivering change by focusing on Auckland Plan transformational shift 2, “strongly commit to environmental action and green growth”.

3.   It is proposed that ESAP will deliver benefits in environmental governance, commitment to environmental action and green growth, articulation of environmental challenges and interpretation of the Auckland Plan to the level required to implement action.

4.   The scope developed to deliver on these benefits is detailed in this paper and relates to the following topics:

·    Plan development process;

·    Environmental governance and decision making;

·    Engagement with internal and external stakeholders on environment action;

·    Identifying opportunities to integrate environmental outcomes into council processes;

·    Flagship Projects and Actions.

5.   Workshops and other face-to-face engagement will be continued from January 2014 and will occur through the first half of the year.  CCO’s will be involved in this internal engagement.

6.   An appropriate approach to engagement is being developed which is likely to include a focus on environmental groups and industries, online engagement (including People’s Panel), as well as activities to target communities who are often less involved.  Analysis of key external groups is underway.

7.   It is proposed that ESAP will have a five-year planning horizon.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      endorse the proposed benefits and scope of the Environment Strategic Action Plan.

b)      receive a progress update on approach to internal and external engagement.

 

 

Discussion

Context and Background

8.   Auckland currently does not have a coordinated, aligned and efficient programme of strategic action to deliver improved environmental outcomes.  To address this gap, the Regional Development and Operations Committee approved the mandate for ESAP to proceed as part of the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme in October 2011.  It was decided that ESAP would create a “road map” of actions to implement the directions set in the Auckland Plan.

9.   ESAP was reported to the Auckland Plan Committee[1] in December 2012 as “an all-encompassing environment action plan”.  In June 2013 it was reported to the Auckland Plan Committee[2] that ESAP would be “a substantial document which brings together a number of related environment policies and action plans”.

10. A project concept was outlined and presented to the Environment and Sustainability Forum on 20 August 2013[3] resulting in a resolution (ES/2013/45) that the Forum:

a)   endorse the work completed to date, the expected deliverables and the general approach being taken by the Environment Strategic Action Plan;

b)   request that officers report back to the relevant committee on scenarios for how internal and external engagement will be approached and proposal for the planning horizon of Environment Strategic Action Plan.

11. ESAP will establish a “line of sight” between environmental actions and the Auckland Plan (Figure 1).  This is a clear need across many themes of the Auckland Plan to enable effective implementation.

12. The primary Auckland Plan outcome area within the ESAP scope is “a green Auckland”.  Other outcomes that ESAP will contribute to are “a beautiful Auckland that is loved by its people” and “a Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”.

13. ESAP is delivering change by focusing on Auckland Plan transformational shift 2 “strongly commit to environmental action and green growth”.

Figure 1: Alignment of ESAP to Auckland Plan outcomes and transformational shifts

Benefits

14. ESAP will deliver the following benefits:

·        Greater efficiency and effectiveness through well governed, coordinated and strategically prioritised action to deliver positive environmental outcomes for Auckland.

·        Strong commitment to environmental action and green growth through environmental asset management.

·        Articulation of environmental challenges faced by Auckland as a baseline for strategic action.

·        Interpretation of the environmental outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan to the level required to implement action.

Project Scope to Deliver Benefits

15. The following are the specific scope items, organised into themes:

Plan development:

·        Identify and prioritise council actions to achieve positive environmental outcomes for Auckland.

·        Organise actions into relevant priority areas of the Auckland Plan.

·        Develop an effective implementation framework including governance, monitoring (including reviews) and funding.

Environmental governance and decision making:

·        Develop an environmental forum to ensure the environment is a keystone of Auckland’s decision making and that Mana Whenua are empowered in environmental action and green growth.

·        Contribute to Auckland Plan Māori Chapter Priority 2 “Enable Tangata Whenua to Participate in the Co-Management of Natural Resources”.

·        Develop a policy mechanism to ensure environmental impact assessments are incorporated in major decisions.

Engagement with internal and external stakeholders on environment action:

·        Build strong council, CCO, Mana Whenua, community, industry and central government engagement in environmental action and green growth through compelling communication of Auckland’s environment story.

·        Create a focus on the environment consistent with achieving the world's most liveable city.

·        Integrate with the Unitary Plan, Auckland’s key statutory resource management plan.

·        Ensure internal and external stakeholders are consulted on a draft plan to improve quality and buy-in.

Identifying opportunities to integrate environmental outcomes into council processes:

·        Develop the environment into an Auckland Council asset class, with associated roles, reporting, processes and integration with other asset classes.

·        Identify opportunities to integrate environmental outcomes into council processes, including procurement processes that drive vendor behavior.

·        Develop a prioritisation mechanism for positive environmental actions.

Flagship Projects and Actions:

·        Design and implement flagship projects and actions that deliver immediate environmental outcomes and build engagement in ESAP.

Planning Horizons

16. The proposed planning horizon for ESAP is five years.

Internal Engagement

17. ESAP has engaged a range of internal stakeholders in workshops to define the scope and identify benefits.

18. Specific internal engagement opportunities identified for ESAP include the Business Services Review, Auckland Plan addendum update and the Long Term Plan process in 2014.  Other strategic action plan leads (e.g. topics such as carbon mitigation, water, housing, waste, children and young people) will be further engaged to ensure that ESAP adds value and integrates.

19. ESAP is being prepared by a team of subject matter, policy, project management and change management experts from across council departments.  Workshops and other face-to-face engagement will be initiated from January 2014 and will occur through the first half of 2014.  CCO’s will be involved in this internal engagement.

Political Engagement

20. The Governing Body will be involved in key decisions relating to the plan development.  Local Boards are being approached via Communications and Publics Affairs to determine how and when they will input to the plan.  Workshops are a likely scenario of how ESAP will engage with political members.  Local Board relationship managers and Democracy Services will be contacted regarding resolutions from this report.

External Engagement

21. Council’s Communications and Public Affairs team are working with the project team to develop an appropriate approach to consultation and engagement.  This is likely to include a focus on environment groups and industries, online engagement (including the People’s Panel), as well as activities to target communities who are often less involved.

22. As part of ESAP, Auckland Council staff will work with external stakeholders to identify and commit to specific actions.  Analysis of key external groups is underway and the general categories identified are:

·        Mana Whenua

·        Mataawaka

·        Sector groups

·        NGOs

·        Community groups

·        Central government

·        General public

Consideration

Local Board Views

23. This project is seen to be of major interest to Local Board implementation programmes in their areas.  Local Board Services have been made aware of ESAP and will be approached to ensure members have the opportunity to meaningfully contribute.  The balance between strategic Auckland-wide actions and priorities and local place-based initiatives will need to form the basis for ESAP.

24. Environmental action is a common theme in Local Board Plans.  Place-based community values, aspirations and concerns about the natural environment are expressed through Local Boards and ESAP will need to integrate with Local Board Plans.  Local Boards initiate and champion environmental action, so ESAP must engage with Local Boards on their projects to make ESAP successful.  Additionally, Local Boards will be an important link to integrate business and community initiatives into the ESAP

Maori Impact Statement

25. This project is of significant interest to Mana Whenua, as evidenced by recent negotiations around environmental governance and management in the Treaty claims settlement processes.

26. Mātauranga Māori provides an integrating world view that aligns well with the central strategic direction of Chapter 7 of the Auckland Plan: Acknowledge that nature and people are inseparable.  ESAP will seek opportunities for Mātauranga Māori to monitor and measure environmental actions over time.

27. ESAP will work with Te Waka Angamua and the newly formed internal working group on co-governance and co-management to determine how best to engage with Mana Whenua.

28. ESAP will identify opportunities to contribute to Auckland Plan Māori Chapter Priority 2 “Enable Tangata Whenua to participate in the Co-Management of Natural Resources”.

General

29. There are no other known issues requiring consideration at this stage of the project.

Implementation Issues

30. There are no known implementation issues at this stage of the project.  However, development and implementation of ESAP will require ongoing resource and staff commitment and any issues of this nature would need to be addressed.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Brad Scarfe, Principal Specialist Water

Roger Bannister, Team Leader Water

Gael Ogilvie, Manager Environmental Services

Authorisers

Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy & Policy Manager

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Appeal to the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan

 

File No.: CP2013/26603

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To advise the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee of the appeal lodged to the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan.

Executive Summary

2.       The Hunua Ranges Regional Parks support significant ecological, water supply, recreational and cultural values. While Auckland Council continues to own and manage the parks 62 per cent of the Hunua Ranges Regional Park and all of the adjoining Waharau and Whakatiwai Regional Parks are now within the Waikato region as a result of the 2010 Local Government reorganisation. Auckland Council carries out extensive pest management programmes in the regional parks and on adjoining private land to protect the significant values of the Hunua Ranges Regional Parks.

3.       In order for Auckland Council to continue to protect the significant values of the Hunua Ranges Regional Parks it is important that the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan (Waikato RPMP) provide a statutory basis, under the Biosecurity Act 1993, for Auckland Council’s pest management programmes. The Proposed Waikato RPMP, notified in March 2013, does not provide an adequate statutory basis for Auckland Council’s current pest management programmes in the Hunua Ranges and buffer area, particularly with regard to kauri dieback, feral deer, pigs, goats, and possums.  These are considered to be substantial failings in the Waikato RPMP that put the significant values of the Hunua Ranges at risk.

4.       Auckland Council lodged a submission to the Waikato RPMP seeking to remedy these failings and provide for Council’s pest management programmes. The submission also sought that the organism (PTA) which causes kauri die back be declared a pest in the Waikato Region.  Council’s submission was approved by the Regional Development and Operations Committee in May 2013. Watercare Services Ltd also lodged a submission to the Plan which was specific to the protection of Auckland’s water supply in the Hunua Ranges.

5.       WRC’s decisions on submissions do not address the failings raised in Council’s submission. In order to continue to seek the relief sought in Council’s submission and retain legal standing in the determination of the RPMP provisions applicable to the Hunua Ranges Council has appealed the WRC decisions to the Environment Court. The appeal has been lodged by Council’s Legal Services Unit in accordance with the authority delegated to the Manager of Regulation and Litigation. Watercare Services has also lodged an appeal to the Waikato RPMP which is consistent and aligned with Council’s appeal.

6.       It is intended to seek resolution of Council’s appeal by negotiation and mediation in the first instance.

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      note the appeal lodged to the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan.

 

 

Discussion

7.       The Hunua Ranges Regional Parks support significant ecological, water supply, recreational and cultural values. The 2010 local government reorganisation included an adjustment to the boundary between Auckland Council and Waikato Regional Council and as a result of that adjustment 62 per cent of the Hunua Ranges Regional Park and all of the adjoining Waharau and Whakatiwai Regional Parks now lies within the Waikato region.  However Auckland Council continues to own and manage the land and assets in these parks.  In particular Auckland Council carries out extensive pest management programmes to protect the significant values of the Hunua Ranges Regional Parks. The programmes are carried out in the regional parks and in a buffer area on adjoining private land.

8.       The Waikato Regional Council (WRC) notified a Proposed Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan 2013 to 2023 (the Waikato RPMP) in March 2013.  In order for Auckland Council to continue to protect the significant values of the Hunua Ranges, Waharau and Whakatiwai Regional Parks it is important that the Waikato RPMP provide a statutory basis, under the Biosecurity Act 1993 (the Act), for Auckland Council’s pest management programmes in the Hunua Ranges and the buffer area.

9.       The Waikato RPMP does not provide an adequate statutory basis for Auckland Council’s current pest management programmes in the Hunua Ranges and buffer area, particularly with regard to kauri dieback, feral deer, pigs, goats, and possums.  These are considered to be substantial failings in the Waikato RPMP that put the significant values of the Hunua Ranges at risk.

10.     Auckland Council lodged a submission to the Waikato RPMP seeking to remedy these failings and provide for Council’s pest management programmes. The submission also sought that the organism (PTA) which causes kauri die back be declared a pest in the Waikato Region.  Council’s submission was approved by the Regional Development and Operations Committee in May 2013. Water Services Ltd also lodged a submission to the Plan which was specific to the protection of Auckland’s water supply in the Hunua Ranges.

11.     Waikato Regional Council released its decisions on submissions in October 2013. While the decisions state that the Auckland Council submission is accepted in part, no changes have been made to address the issues raised in Council’s submission. The decisions state that WRC will consider amending the Waikato RPMP to include special provisions for the Hunua Ranges at a later date but that this cannot be done until Auckland Council has consulted with affected landowners.  The decisions also state that WRC may undertake a review of the RPMP at a later date to include PTA as a pest organism. Similarly the decisions state that the Watercare submission is accepted in part but no changes have been made to address the submission.

12.     In order to continue to seek the relief sought in its submission (i.e. provision in the Waikato RPMP for the pest management programmes Council funds and manages in the Hunua Ranges) and to retain legal standing in the determination of the provisions applicable to the Hunua Ranges Council has appealed the WRC decisions on its submission to the Environment Court. The appeal has been lodged by Council’s Legal Services Unit in accordance with the authority delegated to the Manager of Regulation and Litigation.

13.     It is intended to seek resolution of the appeal by negotiation and mediation in the first instance. In regard to the WRC statement that consultation is required to give effect to the relief sought in Council’s submission, it is considered that there is no statutory requirement for Auckland Council to undertake any further consultation with landowners beyond that which has already occurred as part of the Waikato RPMP review process. However, it is recognised that informal consultation with affected landowners is not inappropriate given the change in the statutory boundaries and pest management plans that has occurred in the area. Council officers propose to undertake informal consultation with landowners in the area while seeking resolution of the content of the Waikato RPMP with WRC

14.     Watercare Services has also lodged an appeal to the Waikato RPMP which is consistent and aligned with Council’s appeal. Watercare Services is also seeking resolution of its appeal by negotiation and mediation in the first instance and is working in conjunction with Auckland Council staff to achieve the common outcomes sought in the appeals. In reply to the appeals WRC is also seeking to progress a resolution through negotiation in the first instance and has undertaken to report to The Environment Court by 20 December 2013 on any progress to resolve the appeals.

Local Board Views

15.     The Franklin Local Board is the local board most directly affected by this matter. Council’s submission was supported and endorsed by the Franklin Local Board. Officers will report to the first 2014 meeting of the Franklin Local Board advising of the appeal to the Waikato RPMP.

Maori Impact Statement

16.     In accordance with the Biosecurity Act one of the primary purposes of Auckland Council’s pest management programmes is to prevent or reduce the adverse effects of pests on the relationship between Maori and their culture, traditions, ancestral lands, waters, sites, wahi tapu and taonga.  The appeal assists in the protection of these values by providing for the continuation of Auckland Council’s pest management programmes in the Hunua Ranges and buffer area.

17.     In preparing Council’s submission Council staff contacted and liaised with Ngati Tamaoho, Ngati Paoa, Ngati Maru, Ngati Te Ata and Waikato-Tainui. These iwi have also been advised of Council’s appeal. Waikato-Tainui have stated their support for Council’s submission and have offered to assist in the resolution of the appeals.

Implementation Issues

18.     Funding and management of Auckland Council’s pest management programmes in the Hunua Ranges and buffer area is provided for in the Annual Plan.  Implementation of these programmes requires that they be recognised and provided for in the Waikato RPMP.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Appeal to Waikato RPMP

27

b

Submission to Waikato RPMP

35

      

Signatories

Authors

David Marshall - Principal Specialist Natural Heritage

Authorisers

Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy & Policy Manager

Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 









Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 



















Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Auckland Council Submission to the Department of Conservation on: Proposed variation to the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary; and Brief Review of Maui’s Dolphin Threats Management Plan Decision

 

File No.: CP2013/27691

 

   

 

Purpose

1.       To seek retrospective approval for a technical officer-only submission to the Department of Conservation on Proposed variation to the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary; and

2.       To provide a brief review of the ministerial decisions on the 2012 Review of the Maui’s Dolphin Threat Management Plan Consultation Paper (Attachments C and D) on which Auckland Council made a submission to the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and Department of Conservation (DOC).

Executive Summary

3.       A submission towards the review of the Maui’s Dolphin Threat Management Plan (TMP) was made by Auckland Council on 12 November 2012 (Attachment A).  The decision on the TMP was released on 25 November 2013.

4.       One delay between the TMP Review and its decision a year later was a call for submissions in September 2013 on a proposal to vary the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary in reaction to new sightings data becoming available.  This variation sought to ban set netting around the northern Taranaki Bight to 7 nautical miles (nm) offshore.  Interim measures only included a 2 nm ban, with observer coverage needed to set-net between 2-7 nm.

5.       As Auckland Council had already addressed this issue in its submission on the TMP in 2012, in requesting that the set-net ban “should apply to Taranaki to 7 nm if this is all that is available” and, further, that the council considered a 12 nm ban on set-nets to be more appropriate, the 2013 submission on the variation simply reiterated this position.  For this reason, and since the closing date for submissions fell during the week prior to the local body elections, the 2013 submission was lodged as an “officer-only” technical submission.

6.       The need for retrospective approval of the 2013 submission and the timing of the ministerial decision on the overall TMP makes it possible to also provide a short summary of the TMP in terms of what the 2012 submission called for and the outcome of the decision (see Attachment D).

7.       A timeline of Maui’s dolphin protection is provided in Attachment B.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      approve the Auckland Council Submission to the Department of Conservation on: Proposed variation to the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary.

b)      receive a short presentation on the outcome of the Maui’s Dolphin Threat Management Plan submission process and consider any responses to the Department of Conservation and the Ministry for Primary Industries.

 

 

Discussion

8.       The 2012 Maui’s TMP Review covered many threats to Maui’s dolphin.  Auckland Council took a strong stance on the protection of this animal, the most endangered dolphin on Earth.  Maui’s dolphin is only found on the west coast of the North Island, with Auckland waters being its heartland.

9.       There are an estimated 55 Maui’s dolphins remaining, making any loss of a single individual significant to the chance of extirpation (localised extinction) of this sub-species of Cephalorhynchus hectori.  Maui’s are a sub-species (Cephalorhynchus hectori maui), with Hector’s dolphin (Cephalorhynchus hectori hectori) being the other sub-species.  Hector’s dolphins have now been found in the Maui’s population, blurring this distinction.

10.     New sightings were reported and other older WWF (World Wildlife Fund) NZ-sourced sightings verified a greater offshore distribution than was known at the time of the 2012 TMP review in the area of the North Taranaki Bight from between 2 and 7 nm between Pariokariwa Point and the Waiwhakaiho River (Waitara variation).  A 7 nm set-net ban had not been posed as an option in the review.  The Minister of Conservation, therefore, chose to have a one-month submission period in October 2013 to allow this issue to be remedied within his overall decision on the TMP in total.

11.     The outcome of the process saw the closure of this area to set-netting.  What is unusual about this closure is that it was made under the Marine Mammals Protection Act rather than the Fisheries Act.  All other fisheries controls protecting Maui’s dolphin have been fisheries measures under the Fisheries Act.  A bill is going forward to increase the powers of DOC compliance staff and to increase penalties under conservation legislation so that they reflect the stiffer fisheries counterparts.

12.     This decision was released as part of the overall TMP decision.  A summary of the decisions are found on the map in Attachment C and the table in Attachment D.  Many of the threats which had been assessed and optioned in the TMP review have no apparent decision.  Council has requested verification on these points and awaits a reply from DOC and MPI.

13.     Recent Auckland Council submissions on Oil and Gas Block Offer 2014 and Activity Classifications under the EEZ Act both refer to effects on Maui’s dolphins based on the Maui’s TMP submission.

Consideration

Local Board Views

14.     Local Board Services were asked to disseminate the submission for comment.  Henderson-Massey Local Board was the only response.

Maori Impact Statement

15.     All mana whenua iwi were consulted.  Te Kawerau a Maki supported the submission.

General

16.     There are no general issues associated with this report.

Implementation Issues

17.     There are no implementation issues associated with this report.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Council Submission to the Department of Conservation on: Proposed Variation to the West Coast North Island Marine Mammal Sanctuary

57

b

Timeline of Protection for Maui's Dolphin

61

c

Map of TMP Zones

65

d

Outline of TMP Decision

67

     

Signatories

Authors

Will Trusewich, Coastal Specialist

Authorisers

Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy & Policy Manager

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 





Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 




Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 






Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Appointments to Ark in the Park Governance Group

 

File No.: CP2013/25700

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To request that the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee (the Committee) formally agree the appointment of two representatives to the Ark in the Park governance group.

Executive Summary

2.       The Ark in the Park Project (the Project) was launched in 2002 and is a collaborative project between Auckland Council and Forest and Bird (F&B) to enhance the biodiversity and ecosystem of the Waitakere Ranges.  The project currently covers approximately 2,700ha of the Waitakere River catchment of the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park and adjacent private land.  A revised governance agreement for Ark in the Park includes three representatives from Auckland Council on the governance group.

3.       This report requests that the Commitee formally resolve the Auckland Council representatives on the governance group.

 

Recommendations

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      nominate two members of the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee to represent Auckland Council on the Ark in the Park governance group.

 

Discussion

4.       The Ark in the Park project currently covers approximately 2,700ha of the Waitakere River catchment of the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park and adjacent private land.  The Project is being undertaken as a partnership between Auckland Council and Forest & Bird, with the assistance of tangata whenua, Te Kawerau ā Maki.  The aim of the project is to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. By doing so, the project aims to showcase how natural values can be protected and enhanced through community involvement, interagency co-operation and public commitment.

5.       The key objectives of Ark in the Park are as follows;

·       Work together to maintain and restore the mauri and biodiversity of Te Wao nui ō Tiriwa (Waitakere Ranges);

·       Advocate for the Project

·       Engage Auckland communities and tangata whenua in the conservation activities of the project;

·       acknowledge the role of Te Kawerau a Maki as mana whenua for Te Wao nui ō Tiriwa;

·       achieve an appropriate level of representation of the parties on the Ark in the Park Governance Group;

·       provide funding for the project through each partners funding plans and strategies; and

·       develop and implement a strategic plan and an annual work programme.

6.       The Governance Group oversees and reviews the overall direction of the Project, approves an Annual Work Plan and long term Restoration Plan, and recommends the approval of the plans (including funding implications) to the appropriate governance bodies of Auckland Council and Forest & Bird.

7.       The Governance Group meets twice yearly or as may be otherwise agreed between the parties. Membership of the Governance Group will be:

·   Two nominees from the Governing Body of the Auckland Council

·   One nominee from the Auckland Council Waitakere Ranges Local Board

·   One nominee of the Executive of Forest & Bird

·   Two nominees of the Waitakere Branch of Forest & Bird

8.       A technical group with expertise in ecology, project management and community engagement and other relevant areas will be responsible for implementation of the work programme and reporting on progress to the governance group.

Consideration

Local Board Views

9.       Although decision making for regional parks sits with the governing body, the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park sits entirely in the Waitakere Ranges Local Board area.  As such, the Board has included ‘stewardship of the Waitakere Ranges’ as a priority in its Local Board Plan.  The MoU requests that one member of the Board is appointed to the Governance Group.

Maori Impact Statement

10.     A key objective of the Ark in the Park project is acknowledgement of the important role of Te Kawerau a Maki as mana whenua for Te Wao nui ō Tiriwa (The Great Forest of Tiriwa).  Te Kawerau a Maki provide regular assistance to the project.

11.     No consultation with Maori was required for the purposes of this report.  It is acknowledged that environmental management has integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga.

General

12.     No external consultation was required for the purposes of this report.  Ark in the Park is a collaborative project between external partners and Auckland Council departments including Biodiversity, Biosecurity and Regional Parks. This report was written in consultation with Regional Parks.

Implementation Issues

13.     There are no implementation issues arising from this report.  Auckland Council contributes funding to the Ark in the Park project for the resourcing of a project manager, as well as technical advice and support.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Authors

Alastair Jamieson – Team Leader: Biodiversity (Regional)

Authorisers

Gael Ogilive –Manager, Environmental Services

John Dragicevich – Manager, Infrastructure and Environmental Services

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

2013 Environmental Initiatives Fund Allocation

 

File No.: CP2013/27130

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       The report presents the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee with funding recommendations for applications received to the 2013 Environmental Initiatives funding round

Executive Summary

2.       The Environmental Initiatives Fund (EIF) supports Auckland residents to become actively involved in the enhancement and conservation of important local environment and heritage through the provision of funding, practical support and advice to assist community-led initiatives.

3.       For the 2013 EIF funding round the Auckland Council received 146 applications requesting a total of $870,763.  Applications have been assessed against the fund criteria and council officers have set funding recommendations in line with fund guidelines, priorities and agreed funding principles.  It is recommended that $619,512 is allocated to 132 applicants.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee:

a)      approve Environmental Initiatives Fund grant allocations listed in Attachment A: 2013 EIF Funding Recommendations.

 

 

Discussion

4.       The Environmental Initiatives Fund (EIF) is a legacy Auckland Regional Council fund that provides funding, practical support and advice to members of the community to help protect and enhance their local environment and heritage.  Since the first EIF funding round in February 2000, over 1,500 grants worth over $4 million have been awarded.  As the EIF requires a minimum 50% contribution from fund applicants, this equates to environmental and heritage actions valued at over $8 million completed throughout Auckland.

5.       The 2011/2012 interim approach to community funding, endorsed by the Regional Development and Operations Committee (RDOC) in May 2011 allocated budget responsibility for the EIF jointly to the Parks, Recreation and Heritage and Environment and Sustainability fora.  In March 2013 the Regional Development and Operations Committee resolved that the interim community funding arrangements would remain in place for the 2013 / 2014 financial year. 

6.       Following local government elections in October 2013 responsibility for fund allocations from the Environmental Initiatives Fund is now delegated to the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee.

7.       Since the 2012 EIF funding round, the EIF guidelines have been reviewed to address operational issues.  Minor changes include updating:

i) Priorities for the Caring for Place outcome area to recognise sites that meet the ecological significance criteria set out in the Draft Auckland Council Unitary Plan as a priority for funding.

ii) Improved guidance for applicants regarding the use of contractor labour.

iii) Improved guidance for applicants regarding the requirement for third party landowners to contribute to project costs.

iv) Given the new Waste Minimisation and Innovation fund, waste minimisation projects are added to the list of activities excluded from funding.

8.       In total $619,512 is available for allocation through the 2013 EIF funding round.  The EIF includes two funding sources targeted at specific project types: General funding set aside in the Annual Plan available to all projects and a Honda TreeFund contribution received from Honda New Zealand for native tree planting.

Table One:  EIF Funding Sources.

Funding Source

Funding available

General provision from Annual Plan (rates funded)           

$543,120

Honda TreeFund

$76,392

Total

$619,512

 

9.       The EIF opened for applications on Monday 19 August and closed on Thursday 26 September 2013.  The 2013 funding round was advertised on the Auckland Council website, through Auckland Council publications, advertising placed in suburban newspapers and email notifications sent to community contacts.

10.     Applications were accepted for projects in three outcome areas:

1. Access, choice and opportunity

For projects that build the capacity and provide opportunities for people to improve and care for the region’s natural, cultural and physical environment. This includes education, skills development, training and taking action, awareness raising, disability access, health and fitness related to caring for the local environment and heritage.

Priorities: Education for sustainability (environmental education) projects

2. Caring for people

For projects that build community, cultural identity, knowledge and a sense of belonging. This includes heritage values, cultural knowledge, equal opportunities and healthy lifestyles focused on connecting people with the region’s environments and heritage.

Priorities: Kaitiakitanga projects

3. Caring for place and caring for coast

For projects that improve or restore particular locations or the physical environment. This includes archaeological sites, landmark buildings, streams, wetlands, ecological areas, significant landscapes, public spaces and built environments.

Priorities:

1. Regionally and nationally depleted ecosystems including wetlands, dunes, lava and coastal forests as described in the ‘National Priorities for Protecting Rare and Threatened Biodiversity on Private Land’ document (2007:MfE/DoC), Auckland Council’s ‘Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy’ and the Draft Auckland Unitary Plan.

2. Sites meeting the ecological significance criteria set out in the Draft Auckland Unitary Plan.

3. Projects contributing to ecological corridors and connections such as (but not limited to) the area covered by the North-West Wild Link.

4. Conservation plans, heritage assessments and/or other heritage documentation required for historic heritage projects.

5. Historic heritage projects that implement conservation plan and/or other heritage documentation.

11.     Applicants can request up to $15,000 in funding and must contribute at least 50% of the total project costs.  The EIF does not accept applications for retrospective funding. To be eligible for the 2013 funding round, projects are required to start after December 2013 and be scheduled to complete by December 2014.

12.     Ineligible projects include those that are required as part of a consent condition, would result in personal or commercial financial reward, are solely for beautification, are the core business of council or other government agencies or form part of the requirements of a course of study.  A full description of the EIF eligibility criteria is included in the 2013 EIF guidelines.

Consideration

 

13.     In total the 2013 Environmental Initiatives funding round received 146 applications.  Total funding requested by these applications was $870,763 from a total funding pool of $619,512. Forty six (31%) of these applications are from first time applicants.  For comparison, the 2012 EIF funding round received 127 applications requesting $740,620 from a total funding pool of $296,125[4] with 38% of these applications from first time applicants.

14.     All applications were assessed following the process outlined in Attachment C.  Following application screening five applications were deemed to be ineligible. Three applications were deemed ineligible as work would not result in environmental or heritage outcomes, work proposed in one application was a requirement of a resource consent and one application sought funding towards work required for a subdivision consent.

15.     The attached funding recommendations are made after consideration of the application’s assessment score, the EIF guidelines and fund allocation principles. Fund allocation principles were endorsed by the Environment and Sustainability Forum at its meeting on July 22 2013.  It was agreed that a percentage of funding be targeted to each outcome area, and that fund distribution would favour supporting flagship projects with high assessment scores.

Table 2: EIF funding targeted for each outcome area

 

 

Recommended 2013/2014 Budget Split

Recommended 2013/2014 dollar allocation

Access, choice and opportunity

10%

$61,951

Caring for people

10%

$61,951

Caring for place and caring for coast

80%

$495,610

Total      

100%

$619,512

 

16.     It is recommended that 132 applications (93%) are allocated funding and 9 applications (7%) be declined.  The maximum grant recommended for an individual project is $15,000.  The average grant recommended is $4,729.  Funding recommendations for individual applications are listed in Attachment C. 

 

Examples of projects recommended for funding include:

·    Fencing and planting to protect wetlands and waterways

·    Restoration of heritage buildings

·    Native forest restoration

·    Edible garden projects

·    Plant and animal pest control

 

Tables 3 – 5 provide summaries of funding recommendations by outcome areas, location and applicant type.

 

 

Table 3: EIF funding recommendations by funding outcome area

 

Funding Outcome Area

Targeted Funding Allocation %

Number of Applications Received

Number of Applications Recommended

Total Amount of Funding Recommended

Funding Allocation %

Access Choice and Opportunity

10

41

38

$133,790

21.6%

Caring for people *

10

12

9

$46,159

7.5%

Caring for place/ Caring for Coast*

80

93

85

$439,563

70.9%

Total

100

146

132

$619,512

100

 

*Insufficient applications of sufficient quality were received to meet the proposed allocation.

 

Table 4: EIF funding recommendations by location

 

Location

Number of Applications Received

Number of Applications Recommended

Total Amount of Funding Recommended

Funding % Recommended

North

(Rodney / Albany/ North Shore)

55

49

$230,656

37.2%

Central

(Albert-Eden Roskill/ Maungakiekie-Tamaki / Orakei/ Waitemata and Gulf)

42

41

$171,907

27.8%

West

(Waitakere / Whau)

19

16

$74,360

12%

South

(Franklin/ Howick/ Manukau/ Manurewa-Papakura)

24

21

$103,373

16.7%

Region wide

6

5

$39,216

6.3%

Total

146

132

$619,512

100


Table 5: EIF funding recommendations by applicant type

 

Applicant Type

Number of Applications Received

Number of Applications Recommended

Total Amount of Funding Recommended

Funding % Recommended

Community Group

56

52

$273,189

44%

Early Childhood Group

11

9

$19,543

3.1%

Individual

51

46

$220,228

35.6%

Mana Whenua Group

1

1

$11,350

1.9%

School

19

19

$62,431

10%

Other

8

5

$32,771

5.4%

Total

146

132

$619,512

100

 

17.     The EIF is open to applications from individuals, community groups, schools, early childhood centres, businesses, Mana Whenua groups and Maori community groups.  The high level of funding recommended for individuals is a reflection of the number of environmental and heritage areas under private management.

Local Board Views

18.     The interim approach to community funding retains budget and decision making authority for the Environmental Initiatives Fund with the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee with decision-making sitting with the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee.  Local boards are involved with promotion of the funding round and will receive a summary of funding decisions for their information.

Maori Impact Statement

19.     The provision of community funding to support environmental initiatives provides opportunities for all Aucklanders to undertake projects, programmes and activities that benefit Maori.  The significance of sites to Maori and the extent to which applications recognise Maori perspectives is considered as part of the application screening and assessment process.

General

20.     Finance and resourcing requirements for the delivery of the Environmental Initiatives Fund in 2013/14 are within current budgets provided in the 2013/14 annual plan

Implementation Issues

21.     No implementation issues have been identified.  The fund will be allocated according to the decisions of the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage committee.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

2013 EIF funding recommendations

81

b

2013 EIF guidelines

93

c

Environmental Initiatives Fund assessment process

105

d

2013 EIF assessment summary

107

     

Signatories

Authors

Fran Hayton - Environmental Funding Advisor

Maria Hernandez - Environmental Funding Coordinator

Liana Middeldorp - Environmental Funding Coordinator

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy & Policy Manager

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Attachment One: 2013 Environmental Initiatives Fund funding recommendations

1.         Access, Choice and Opportunity

Target allocation: $61,951 (10%) Recommended allocation: $133,790 (21.6%)

Applicant

Project title

Total weighted score out of 107

Funding recommendation

Hobsonville Point Secondary School

Hobsonville Point Sustainable Habitats project

97

$879.10 as a contribution towards tools for planting and weeding.

Garden to Table

Garden to Table in another 15 Auckland primary schools

95

$4,420 as a contribution towards 10 worm bins.

Steve Hathaway

Young Ocean Explorers

95

$14,950 as a contribution towards video production costs.

Mahurangi Action Incorporated

Productive Riparian Reforestation Demonstration

94.5

$9,561.63 as a contribution towards project trial costs.

Windy Ridge School

Windy Ridge Restoration Project

87

$2,361.88 as a contribution towards native plants, equipment, and materials.

Remuera Intermediate School

Growing Natives for Revegetation at Pourewa Valley (Kepa Bush)

84

$8,000 as a contribution towards the greenhouse, propagation materials and towards teacher release.

East Tamaki Primary School

Waste area to native gardens where birds, geckos and skinks can find a home

83

$560 as a contribution towards eco sourced plants.

Stonefields School

Glass house and shed

82.5

$3,268.85 as a contribution towards glass house, shed, planter tubs, small tools, seed trays and composting mix.

Stanmore Bay School

Stanmore Bay School orchard development

82

$617.80 as a contribution towards fruit trees.

Sustainable Coastlines

Development of Urban Waterways Restoration Resources

81.5

$6,000 as a contribution towards waterway resource development costs.

Henderson Valley School

Planting Irrigation

81.5

$2,986.77 as a contribution towards water tanks, pump and associated material.

Whangaparaoa College

Whangaparaoa College Rata Rd Wetlands

81

$10,000 as a contribution towards site preparation and native plants.

Hillpark School

Hillpark Enviroment Garden Project

78.5

$10,000 as a contribrition towards garden development costs.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Freemans Bay Playcentre - Water Capture System Grant Application (Environmental Sustainability Focus 2013-2014)

77.5

$2,509.50 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Langholm Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$2,575.70 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Balmoral Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$1,989 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Mangere Bridge Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$2,944 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Auckland Playcentres Association

New Windsor Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$2,691 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Newmarket Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$2,352.50 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Oaktree Kindergarten

Children's Forest Area

77.5

$1,000 as a contribution towards native plants, equipment and garden resources.

Auckland Playcentres Association

Herne Bay Playcentre - Water Tank System

77.5

$3,003.75 as a contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

Bridget Fitzgerald

Tauhoa School Orchard – Stage 2

77.5

$1,860.14 as a contribution towards plants for a native hedge and fencing to provide stock protection.

Forrest Hill School

Water Tank

76.5

$1,045.50 as a contribution towards water tank, tank stand, plumbing to divert guttering, hose, labour to build tank stand, sitting tank and plumbing.

Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust

Howick Ward Eradication of Moth Plant Initiative

76.5

$6,845 as a contribution towards project costs including van lease and a horticultre student to deliver the project.

Milford School

Stage 1: School Water Tank project

76

$2,850 as a contribution towards a water tank and installation.

Triangle Park Massey Community Garden

Triangle Park Massey Community Garden

75

$3,151 as a contribution towards a water pump, shade sail and signage.

Parnell Community Trust

Sustainability through growing own fresh produce

74

$1,125.80 as a contribution towards planter boxes, plants and material for preschool garden.

Lower Scroggy Stream Sustainable Neighbourhood

Fruit trees for Fruitvale Road

72

$1,150 as a contribution towards fruit trees and necessary associated materials.

Northcross Intermediate School

Northcross Kai Kete

71

$9,000 as a contribution towards garden development including raised beds and garden shed.

Adventure Camp Trust Board

Propagation Shed and Planting Area

69.5

$6,036.75 as a contribution towards the construction of the propogation shed.

Wainui School

Wainui School Re-usable Bag Project

69

$1,035 as a contribution towards material costs to produce calico bags.

Onehunga Leisure Limited, Chill Out Programme.

Environmental Education - Vegetable Garden

65

$351 as a contribution towards tools and planter boxes.

Maungawhau School

Maungawhau School Garden

63.5

$1,235.82 as a contribution towards gardening tools, seeds, seedlings, fruiting plants, seed raising mix, posts, wire, cement and other garden resources.

Birkenhead Playcentre

Stream and Food Forest

62

$2,500 as a contribution towards the cost of a rain tank and installation.

Hope n Help Charitable Trust

Garden Project

62

$2,195 as a contribution towards administration and material costs associated with creating and maintaining a community garden, and running workshops once a week on healthy eating.

Takapuna Primary School

Native Grove

55

$1,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

Albany Senior High School

Aquaponics - Raising native tree seedlings in a sustainable and healthy environment.

55

$260 as a contribution towards the purchase of equipment to set up aquaponic systems, equipment for the control method and sample seed populations.

Opaheke School Parent Teacher Association

Opaheke School Community Vegetable Garden

55

$1,500 as a contribution towards gardening materials including  timber for framing, stakes, hardware and garden mix soil.

Prema Charitable Trust

Eco-Festival 2014

48

Decline due to limited environmental benefits.

Mun Leong Soong

To scientifically grow garden edibles all year round under the Awhitu Peninsula climate using high productive raised garden beds.

37

Decline due to limited environmental benefits.

 

2.         Caring for People

Target allocation: $61,951 (10%)  Recommended allocation: $46,159 (7.5%)

Applicant

Project title

Total weighted score out of 107

Funding recommendation

Ngati Whatua o Orakei Trust Board

Kainga Ora: Connecting whanau with whenua

82.5

$11,350 as a contribution towards compost bins, hungry bins and plants.

Jadewynn Drive Community Garden

Pre-school landscaping project

80

$575.64 as a contribution towards timber.

McLaren Park Henderson South (MPHS)

HubWest community garden

78

$3,913.50 as a contribution towards garden materials including garden boxes, mulch, fruit trees and rain barrels.

St Patricks Cathedral

Further Works: Conservation of Archaeological Artefacts from St. Patrick's Cathedral Excavation

74

$1,213 as a contribtion towards materials for storing and conserving artefacts.

Jadewynn Drive Community Garden

Jadewynn Drive Community Garden (garden shed)

73

$351.76 as a contribtion towards garden tools.

The Classic Yacht Charitable Trust

Preservation of 1894 Classic Yacht the "Waitangi"

73

$6,050 as a contribution towards replacement of blocks and aspects of rigging.

Attainable Trust

Community garden project

66

$6,594.90 as a contribution towards materials, green house, water tank, fittings and worm farm.

Peacemakers Trust

Indigenous Landscape community garden project

64

$9,109.98 as a contribution towards native plants, landscape contractor and stump grinding.

Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind

RNZFB Archive Redevelopment Project

60.5

$7,000 as a contribtion towards archiving material and equipment costs.

Protect Piha Heritage Society Inc

Protect Piha Heritage: 1. Reprint "Into the West" by Jan Barnes 2. Purchase 100 cat collars with bells to distribute free from the Piha Store 3. Organise two talks on environmental / heritage issues.

50

Decline due to limited environmental benefits.

 

 

 

3.         Caring for Place and Caring for Coast

Target allocation: $495,610 (80%)  Recommended allocation: $439,563 (70.9%)

Applicant

Project title

Total weighted score out of 107

Funding  recommendation

Friends of Mangemangeroa

Restoration on the Mangemangeroa Reserve

98

$663 as a contribution towards nursery supplies, large root trainer pots, pots and potting mix.

Motuihe Trust

Motuihe Native Tree Nursery 2014

98

$10,907.50 as a contribution towards potting mix.

Windy Hill Rosalie Bay Catchment Trust

Petrels, Parrots and Monitoring - continuing the aviary development for red crowned kakariki, surveying further for petrels, and sustaining our comprehensive monitoring programme.

98

$3,921 as a contribution towards Kakariki next boxes, data analysis, seabird survey and invertebrate monitoring

Woodlands Estate

Weed control in two areas of regenerating native bush areas of approx 5 1/2 hectares

97

Decline due to risks associated with uncertainy regarding future land ownership.

Tawharanui Open Sanctuary Society Inc

Establishing a colony of Australasian Gannets at Tawharanui Open Sanctuary

96

$6,382.50 as a contribution towards gannet decoys and a sound system.

T and M Stazyk Partnership/CUE Haven

CUE Haven Restoration Project

95

$10,000 towards native plants.

Tamahunga Trappers

Tamahunga Trappers Pest Control 2013

94.5

$3,690 as a contribution towards DoC250 traps and setting tools.

Matt Wech Family trust

Waterway Restoration Project

93.5

$6,999.30 as a contribution towards native plants.

Whangateau HarbourCare Group (Inc.)

Whangateau Harbour Shoreline Protection and Access

93.5

$4,655 as a contribution towards native plants and site preparation.

Manaia Properties Ltd

Continued Riparian Planting of the Mataia Stream

92.5

$8,750 as a contribution towards fencing.

Rangitoto College

Windsor Park Ark Project

92.5

$2,587.50 as a contribution towards native plants and a weed control contractor.

Forest Edge Family Trust

Barrett Road Bushland Fencing

92.5

$10,314.40 as a contribution towards fencing.

Pukekohe East Church Preservation Society Inc

2013 Repairs to Heritage Church Building

92

$4,798.50 as a contribution towards church repair works.

Awaawaroa Bay Ltd

Support towards 2014 Weed Control Work

91

$1,500 as a contribution towards weed control costs.

Orama Christian Trust

Karaka Bay Stream Restoration Project

91

$6,677.70 as a contribution towards native plants, rabbit proofing materials and potting mix.

The Wilson Home Trust

Restoring a Heritage Gift: The Wilson Home Trust - Site Revegetation, Stage Two

90.5

$3,954.25 as a contribution towards materials, plants and a weed control contractor.

Orapiu Neighbourhood Group

Rehabilitation of the Orapiu Coastal Environment.

90

$3,000 as a contribution towards a weed control contractor.

Le Roys Bush and Little Shoal Bay Reserves Charitable Trust

Little Shoal Bay Wetland Restoration Project 2014

89.5

$15,000 as a contribution towards weed control.

Muriwai Valley Farm

Long Gully Wetland Restoration 2014

89

$15,000 as a contribution towards fencing.

Rob Fenwick

Te Matuku Predator Management Project

88.5

$4,499.37 as a contribution towards bait and bait stations.

Roseline Klein

Maungawhau - Weeding and planting below Clive road, on Auckland Grammar School ground

88

$4,230 as a contribution towards native plants and weed control.

The Whau River Catchment Trust and Friends of the Whau Inc

Whau River Restoration

88

$15,000 as a contribution towards plants, herbicide, weed bags, weed spraying contractor and animal pest control.

Forest Ridge Community Group (FRCG)

Forest Ridge Pest Control 2013/2014

88

$4,063.20 as a contribution towards a GPS unit, herbicide and contractor time.

Hibiscus Coast Forest and Bird

Matakatia Scenic Reserve Conservation

88

$2,530 as a contribution towards cliff pest plant control.

Elizabeth Collins

Bush Restoration Oruamo Place

88

$4,301 as a contribution towards native plants, site preparation and contractor labour.

2 Crescent Road

2 Crescent Road Restoration Project

88

$350.75 as a contribution towards native plants.

Nuhaka Trust

Native Bush and Wetland Restoration

87

$6,511 as a contribution towards fencing and weed control.

Sandspit SOS Inc.

Sandspit Reserve Restoration Project 2013

86.5

$3,236.40 as a contribution towards growsafe, equipment and materials, and a pest control contractor.

Warwick and Gail Stent

Pare-dise Alley Restoration Project

86

$2,300 as a contribution towards pest plant control.

Capstone Farm Ltd

Water Reticulation and Stock Exclusion Fencing for Stream and Wetland Protection

84.5

$15,000 as a contribution towards water supply scheme, water pump and fencing labour and materials.

Purewa Restoration Group

Implementation of 2013 Ecological Plan for Selwyn Bush - 1st Stage

84.5

$7,250 as a contribution towards native plants and weed control.

McLaren Park Henderson South (MPHS)

Stream Restoration

84

$8,077 as a contribution towards plants, potting mix and weed control.

Pahurehure Inlet Protection Society

Pahurehure Esplanade Wetlands Replanting-2013

84

$3,640 as a contribution towards native plants.

Vivienne Wise

Wetland Restoration

84

$1,000 as a contribution towards native wetland plants.

Chris Severne

Meola Restoration- Animal Pest Control

83.5

$687.47 as a contribution towards animal pest control.

Thornton Place

Thornton Place Restoration

83

$2,000 as a contribution towards native plants and follow up weed control.

Friends of Churchill Park

Improving the Environmental and Amenity Value of Churchill Park

82.5

$5,275 as a contribution towards a brushcutter and native plants.

Forest & Bird North Shore Branch

Forest and Bird Tuff Crater Restoration Project

82.5

$8,230.50 as a contribution towards weed control and ecosourced native plants.

Suzanne Reid

Creation of Green Corridor to Link Planted Areas within Forest Edge Community Group Project

82.5

$3,000 as a contribution towards plants and fencing.

Matingarahi Station

Matingarahi Station SEA Fencing

82

$15,000 as a contribution towards fencing of two bushblocks.

North Shore Riding Club Inc

North Shore Riding Club Pest Contol Project

81.5

$1,435 as a contribution towards animal pest control.

Waiatarua Reserve Protection Society

Waiatarua Reserve Restoration Project

80

$3,200 as a contribution towards native plants and weed control contractor.

Sustainable Coastlines

Love Your Coast Waiheke 2014 Awareness and Beach Clean Up Event

80

$9,299 as a contribution towards event equipment, transport and workshop art materials.

Kaitiaki of Newton Reserve Charitable Trust

Newton Reserve Restoration 2013-2014

79.5

$2,700 as a contribution towards native plants.

Kevin Wragge

Rakino Island Reforestation Project - Stage IV

79

$7,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

Jon Boyd

Re-fence and Plant 300m Strip of Streamside.

78.5

$2,450 as a contribution towards a fencing contractor and materials.

John Fisher

Forest Edge Stream Restoration

77.5

$4,585.40 as a contribution towards native plants.

Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society

Selwyn Bush Restoration 2013-15 Action Plan

77

$3,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

John and Margot Andrew

Restoration of Ceilings in Marivare.

77

$5,000 as a contribution towards material and labour costs involved with restoration of the ceilings.

Titirangi Primary School

Titirangi Primary School Weed Control Plan

77

$2,000 as a contribution towards preparation of a weed plan.

Waiuku Golf and Squash Club Inc.

Implementation of Year One Restoration Plan

76

$10,000 as a contribution towards Year One of the restoration plan including weed control, plants and planting.

Shane Panettiere and Leonie Brown

Protecting our Significant Ecological Area

76

$920 as a contribution towards fencing costs.

O’Shea Brothers

Awana Creek Fencing & Planting

76

$6,669.56 as a contribution towards fencing materials and freight costs.

Tony Steer

Harry Dreadon Ecological Restoration

75

$3,309.61 as a contribution towards native plants, pest control items and fencing.

Wairoa River Landcare Inc

Supply of Potting and Seed Raising Mix and Potting Bags for Plant Nursery

75

$1,000 as a contribution towards potting mix, seed raising mix and planter bags.

Emma Pritchard

Rock Walls Restoration/ Repair Project - Champtaloup House, Mt Eden

75

$2,455 as a contribution towards the restoration and repair of the rockwall.

Emma Pritchard

Roof Restoration/ Replacement Project- Champtaloup House Mt Eden

75

$2,880 as a contribution towards roof restoration costs.

Simon Gordon

William Pitcher Rd / Te Kawau Pass - Back to Native

74

$3,000 as a contribution towards skip bins, sprays and native plants.

Stephen Hendry

Bush Restoration at 10 Raymond Tce

74

$1,209.75 as a contribution towards plants, materials and labour.

Dan Dollimore

Tributary of Te Pahi Stream Restorative Riparian Planting

73.5

$7,798.50 as a contribution towards fencing materials, a contractor to ram posts and native plants.

Awhitu Peninsula Historical Society Inc

Building Repairs and Painting

72

$3,335 as a contribution towards a contractor and materials.

Nuhaka Trust

Heritage Cottage Restoration

72

$1,585.90 as a contribution towards a contractor and materials.

St Marks Anglican Church Swanson

Restoration of St Marks Church Swanson

72

$7,043 as a contribution towards church restoration materials.

Hauroko Farm Trust

Planting Wetland and Streambank

71.5

$5,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

The Helensville Railway Station Trust

Helensville Railway Station Maintenance

70

$7,130 as a contribution towards a contractor and paint for the roof and wall.

Kiwi Heritage Homestay

Heritage Category III Art Deco Homestay House Maintenance for External Wood Joinery

70

$4,745 as a contribution towards labour for painting.

Andrew Button

Bush restoration at 215A Schnapper Rock Rd.

69

$293.80 as a contribution towards native plants.

Anne Ginders

Road Paddock Restoration

69

$3,100 as a contribution towards felling macrocarpa trees.

Motutapu Restoration Trust

Closing The Gap - weed clearance between new planting and remnant bush in Central Gully

68.5

$15,000 as a contribution towards weed control including herbicide and weed control labour.

Hannah Smith

Extension of area of natural significance bounded by Muriwai and Schools Roads

68

$4,000 as a contribution towards native plants and fencing.

Murmark Holdings Ltd

Fencing to protect and enhance Araparera River

68

$3,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

West Bay Rakino Island

Regeneration Wetlands Stage 2

68

$7,000 as a contribution towards native plants.

Centennial Park Bush Society

Weed Control at Centennial Park

68

$1,150 as a contribution towards a weed contractor to control tradescantia.

St. Mark's Anglican Church

Repair of Church Roof

66

$5,750 as a contribution towards church roof repair.

Mark Dunlop

Restoration project at 15 Oakford Park Crescent, Greenhithe

64

$1,689.47 as a contribution towards native plants.

Michael & Elizabeth Parker

Tirikohua Bush Regeneration

63

$4,500 as a contribution towards fencing costs.

Geoffrey Thompson

Replacement of the old roof for heritage building

63

$11,106.12 as a contribution towards completion of corrugated roofing, labour and materials.

Milvia Goldstein

6 Hillside Crescent Native Revegetation of Mt Eden Boundary

63

$1,599 as a contribution towards native plants and weed control contractor.

June Brookes

Pateke - Brown Teal- Habitat Enhancement Project

62

$2,830 as a contribution towards a fencing contractor and fencing materials.

Philip Cole

Heritage Property Restoration - Fowey Ave, Te Atatu South

61

$10,000 as a contribution towards scaffolding, repairs and painting to the original cottage.

Nigel Marshall

Wetland Restoration

60

$1,000 as a contribution towards a weed control contractor.

Motu Kaikoura Trust

Motu Kaikoura Weed Management

57

$2,798.71 as a contribution towards the cost of spraying of weeds (mainly pampas) by helicopter.

Omaha Shorebird Protection Trust

Omaha Spit restoration planting

57

Decline as biosecuity issues at the project site need to be addressed before additional funding for planting is granted.

Andrew Pennington

Wetland fencing and restoration project

56

$3,280 as a contribution towards fencing materials and a contractor to drive the fence posts.

Jan Gardner

Painting of house (front)

54

$3,000 as a contribution towards a professional painter.

Jodi Pringle

Repairs / restoration to our heritage house (St Clements Church)

52

$1,000 as a contribution towards window replacement.

Patumahoe Community Support Charitable Trust

Exterior painting of historic church, now a community building

52

$11,709.87 as a contribution towards painting, labour and materials.

Project Litefoot Trust

Litefoot's "LiteClub" Programme

48.5

Decline as Council officers need to work with applicant group to address issues with current work practice before any additional funding is granted.

Riverhead Tavern

The Riverhead - Foreshore restoration

38

Decline as compared to other applications received this project was not identifed as a priority for funding.

Celia Ruane

Schollum Rd Erosion Control Native Regeneration

35

Decline as compared to other applications received this project was not identifed as a priority for funding.

Seumus Cooney

19 De Val Drive Stormwater Design

15

Decline as compared to other applications received this project was not identifed as a priority for funding.

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 












Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

Attachment Three: Environmental Initiatives Fund (EIF) Assessment Process

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Environmental Initiatives Fund (EIF) opened for applications on Monday 19 August and closed on Thursday 26 September.  Fund guidelines and application information were available through the Auckland Council website or by contacting Environmental Funding staff.

 

Applications could be submitted by post, email, through the EIF Online (EIFO) application system, or in person at any Auckland Council service centre.  Applications could not be submitted by fax. All applications were acknowledged on receipt.

 

All applications were screened by Environmental Funding Co-ordinators for eligibility and completeness.  Those applications involving ground disturbance (i.e. planting projects) were screened by a council Heritage Information Advisor and where required reviewed by a council Archaeologist to ensure the protection of sites of archaeological significance.

 

Applications which met eligibility criteria were assessed by council officers from Biodiversity, Biosecurity, Education for Sustainability, Environmental Partnerships, and Built Heritage Implementation teams.  The council officer who lead the assessment was determined by the nature of the application.

 

As part of this assessment process, council officers contacted applicants and completed site visits where required.  Site visits were generally completed where the application was for a high value grant or where the council officer was unfamiliar with the site.  Applications were assessed against the following criteria:

 

1.   Environmental impact and benefits

·    The type of environmental impact and benefit the project will produce.

·    The extent to which the proposal directly promotes, enhances or protects the environment or cultural heritage.

·    The type and significance of the environment or heritage involved.

·    The extent to which the project impacts on the efficient of land, water and/or energy usage. 

2.   Feasibility and likelihood of success

·    The project is practical and feasible.

·    The project is likely to be successfully completed, based on the activities and time frames listed in the application.

3.   Community involvement and participation

·    The extent of community involvement in driving the project.

·    The extent of community participation in the project.

4.   Community awareness raising and education

·    The extent to which the project is likely to raise community awareness, understanding of environmental and heritage issues and practices.

·    The extent of a community education component.

5.   Good practices

·    The extent to which the project reflects good practice.

·    The ability of the project to develop and trial new and/or proven methods.

6.   Long term benefits

·    The extent to which the project has a long term (rather than short term) benefit.

7.   Recognizing Maori perspectives

·    The extent to which the project values and celebrates Ao Maori perspectives (Maori world view, culture and values).

 

The outputs from the assessment process are an application assessment summary report including an overall assessment score, council officer comments and an initial funding recommendation.  All completed application assessment summaries were reviewed by Team Leaders and then moderated by the Environmental Funding and Contracts Advisor to ensure consistency in assessment between different council officers.

 

The application assessment summaries are used as the basis from which a panel of senior council officers set final funding recommendations.  Applications are grouped according to their outcome area. Final funding recommendations are set by the senior council officer panel considering all applications within an outcome area then apply the funding guidelines and agreed allocation principles. 

 


Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee

11 December 2013

 

 

 

Funding Outcome Area:  Access Choice and Opportunity

For projects that build the capacity and provide opportunities for people to improve and care for the region’s natural, cultural and physical environment. This includes education, skills development, training and taking action, awareness raising, disability access, health and fitness related to caring for the local environment and heritage.

 

Priority - Education for Sustainability (environmental education) projects. This means projects that link action with learning.

 

Target allocation: $61,951 (10%)

Recommended allocation: $133,790 (21.6%)

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Hobsonville Point Secondary School

APPLICATION NO.

1196

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Hobsonville Point Sustainable Habitats project

LOCATION

44-50 Station Street, Hobsonville

LOCAL BOARD

Upper Harbour Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Increase the biodiversity of Hobsonville Point (which is currently undergoing extensive urban development) through restoration, monitoring and conservation of natural environments.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Hobsonville Point Secondary School is a secondary school providing education to students years 9-13.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A.

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$7879.10

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$4500

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$2500

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$879.10

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Tools for planting and weeding.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

20/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

10/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

10/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

90/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

97/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that the school is granted the full amount of funding requested. The school is committed to using best practice with this long term project. They are actively working to build multiple partners to ensure the project is successful and has multiple benefits to the local and wider environment, as well as student and wider community learning. The request for equipment will allow the school to empower and equip students to take action for their local and wider environment.

 

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$879.10

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

Contribution towards tools for planting and weeding.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Garden to Table

APPLICATION NO.

1216

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Garden to Table in another 15 Auckland primary schools

LOCATION

Schools Auckland-wide

LOCAL BOARD

Region wide

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Establish Garden to Table in 15 more Auckland schools. This project provides resources and support such as training, volunteer labour, equipment, garden products and advice to schools that are starting the Garden to Table journey.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Garden to Table is a community organisation committed to the development of a curriculum focussed programme to engage and teach primary school children about environment, food and food choices through the philosophy of 'grow, harvest, prepare, and share’. It is about the development of good habits for a healthier future.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2,000

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$28,350

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$23,930

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$4,420

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

10 worm farms to assist kick start new schools joining the garden to table programme.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

20/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

10/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

10/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

90/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

95/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that this environmental education project be supported. Garden to Table is a long running programme which has a history of running successful projects. This project has many outcomes, including supporting young people to engage with food production and learn how to grow fruit and vegetables, as well as having organic waste reduction outcomes.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$4,420

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

Contribution towards 10 worm bins.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Steve Hathaway

APPLICATION NO.

1214

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Young Ocean Explorers

LOCATION

Hauraki Gulf

LOCAL BOARD

Region wide

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Create a series of 10 x 3 minute videos which focus on unique marine species to be used in schools. These videos are aimed at year 1-10 students.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Steve Hathaway is an underwater videographer who wishes to create a series of videos that will inspire and educate children using great stories from New Zealand's oceans. Children will understand and appreciate how unique and diverse our oceans are, particularly around the Hauraki Gulf, and the challenges that we face for their management and continued biodiversity.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

NA

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$80,863

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$65,863

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$15,000

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Contribution towards video production costs.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

25/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

10/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

9/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

88/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

95/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that this project be supported. These educational videos are aimed at year 1-10 students. They provide another avenue for students and their families to learn about our unique Hauraki Gulf Marine environment, and provide awareness of local issues, challenging students to provide solutions and actions. The applicant’s work is also being shown on a national children’s television programme which will create more visibility for these educational videos. The applicant has six years experience creating marine film work and is highly likely to succeed. Student feedback to videos has been positive so far, and it is considered that these digital tapes have the potential to change students attitudes and actions towards marine resources, and students will educate their families and others creating lifelong benefits.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$14,950

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

$12,075 towards editing costs, and $2,875 towards sound mixing.


 


Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Mahurangi Action Incorporated

APPLICATION NO.

1241

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Productive Riparian Reforestation Demonstration

LOCATION

17 Hamilton Road, Warkworth

LOCAL BOARD

Rodney Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Provide a productive riparian reforestation demonstration for farmers.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Mahurangi Action Incorporated is a community group who take actions to enhance, protect and restore the environment of the Mahurangi for the benefit and enjoyment of the general community.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

REEF: 2012 $2000, 2011 $2000

 

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$20,046.63

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$10,485

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$9,561.63

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Initial and succession planting plan design, native plants and interpretive signs.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

10/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

10/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

2/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

89.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

94.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Funding is recommended for this project. This demonstration project, positioned prominently for maximum effect, has the broad aim of providing farmers throughout the Mahurangi catchment (and other rural parts of Auckland Council) with an additional model for sustainably contributing to the restoration and management of broad riparian zone ecological corridors in productive pastoral landscapes. As a motivational project with strong scientific support within the project, it has the potential to have very large project outcomes. The applicant has a very strong track record, and strong scientific support within the project. Through encouraging others to take up the demonstrated practices, the project is expected to have substantial long term benefits.

 

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$9,561.63

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards trialling and data collection for the project as well as associated necessary materials.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Windy Ridge School

APPLICATION NO.

1193

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Windy Ridge Restoration Project

LOCATION

54 Seaview Road, Glenfield

LOCAL BOARD

Kaipātiki Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Restoration of Windy Ridge wetlands area to create a sustainable environment for present and future learning. Within this project, students will learn about and care for native plants, soil, and insect and bird species. Students will measure change and learn about how they can make a difference to the environment.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Windy Ridge School is a primary school providing education to students Years 1-6.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$5,361.88

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$3,000

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,361.88

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Native plants and materials for planting of the wetland area.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

20/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

9/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

9/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

80/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

87/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

This project is both practical and feasible. It is the first stage (covering 260m2) in a larger project that will see over 1000m2 developed as a habitat for native species and a valuable educational tool. As a Silver EnviroSchool, Windy Ridge School is committed to students taking action for a sustainable future, and this project will be evidence of that commitment. They are already committed financially to the project, and it forms part of their strategic plan. The school has followed best practice by consulting with local experts (Kaipatiki Trust) and will be using eco sourced plants.  They will have an ongoing relationship with Kaipatiki Trust as well as other organisations which will enhance the success of this project. While the school has indicated that they will be able to proceed with a smaller amount, the likelihood of success will increase with the full amount of funding requested.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,361.88

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

Contribution of $1,470 towards native plants for the wetland, $649.20 towards equipment, and $242.68 towards materials.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Remuera Intermediate School

APPLICATION NO.

1173

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Growing Natives for Revegetation at Pourewa Valley (Kepa Bush)

LOCATION

55 Ascot Avenue, Remuera and Pourewa Valley, Kepa Bush Road, Kohimarama

LOCAL BOARD

Orākei Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Remuera Intermediate student volunteers will be involved in growing native plants for revegetation in the Pourewa Valley and undertaking activities to restore the area. The school will be working with Forest & Bird.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Remuera Intermediate School is an intermediate school providing education to students years 7-8. In delivering education the school aims to have future focus, explore issues (e.g. sustainability, citizenship, justice), make learning authentic, act locally and globally, to foster student leadership and community involvement and promote respect for the diversity of people and cultures in our communities and world.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$26,135

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$13,960

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$12,175

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Purchase of a Greenhouse, materials and contribution towards teacher release.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

25/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

18/30

Community involvement and participation

8/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

77/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

84/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended the project be funded a total of $8,000. The school would like to engage students in an ongoing (5+ year long) local restoration project of the Pourewa Valley, which is part of Kepa Bush Reserve, a recognised Significant Ecological Area. This funding will assist the school with a greenhouse which will be the engine of this long term project. The school is partnering with Forest and Bird, an organisation known to have a long track record in effective ecological restoration using best practice. There is also another well-established ecological restoration organisation working on the Kepa Bush Reserve who have capacity to support Remuera Intermediate should funding for Forest and Birds community coordinator discontinue.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$8,000

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution of $6,500 towards the greenhouse and propagation materials, and $1,500 towards teacher release.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

East Tamaki Primary School

APPLICATION NO.

1229

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Waste area to native gardens where birds, geckos and skinks can find a home.

LOCATION

196S Preston Road, Otara

LOCAL BOARD

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Extend the native garden, transform the waste area and create an area for skinks and geckos which will provide a unique teaching and learning environment for children.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

East Tamaki Primary School are a primary school providing education for Years 1-6.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $788; 2011 $640; 2010 $1,000; 2009 $745;

2008 $975

 

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$1,460

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$900

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$560

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Native plants

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

10/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

8/10

Community awareness raising and education

10/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

10/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

78/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

83/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that this project is funded. It is a simple low cost and feasible project that completes a 4 year native development which has been well done and managed. Students are predominantly Pacifica, or English as a second language students whose families live in rental houses with few native trees. The opportunity for action and hands on learning provided through this project will teach students to care for and look after our native species.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$560

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards native plants.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Stonefields School

APPLICATION NO.

1098

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Glass house and shed for Enviro Group

LOCATION

81 Tihi St Stonefields Auckland

LOCAL BOARD

Orākei Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Stonefields School Enviro Group require a glass house and shed to provide a dedicated space for their environmental projects.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Stonefields School is a primary school for students Years 1-8. Stonefields School is an Enviroschool and has undertaken several projects of this size and scope, however they have not received EIF funding before.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$6,537.70

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$3,268.85

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$3,268.85

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Glass house, shed, planter tubs, small tools, seed trays, composting mix.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

12.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

8/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

7/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

75.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

82.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that the school receive the total funding requested in order to undertake this project. It has been well planned and adheres to sound environmental practice. The students have been involved in a rigorous inquiry process which will lead to a great outcome for the school and potentially for the wider school community. The project is sustainable through the purchase of a glass house and a shed which will enable the students to work all year round. It involves parents and members of the wider community in terms of building the appropriate structures and in using the gardens thereafter.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$3,268.85

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

Contribution towards glass house, shed, planter tubs, small tools, seed trays, composting mix.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Stanmore Bay School

APPLICATION NO.

1265

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Stanmore Bay School Orchard Project

LOCATION

30 Wairoa Road, Whangaparaoa

LOCAL BOARD

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

In collaboration with the children, the school aims to create an orchard near their existing enviro garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Stanmore Bay School is a primary school aiming to start an edible orchard garden.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$1,367.80

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$750.00

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$617.80

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Native plants

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

15/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

6/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

6/10

Long term benefits

10/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

75/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

82/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

This is a practical feasible project being carried out by a school that has a successful track record of completing projects. This project will provide multiple teaching and learning opportunities for both students and the local school community. It is recommended that the full amount asked for be granted.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$617.80

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards fruit trees.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Sustainable Coastlines

APPLICATION NO.

1269

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Development of Urban Waterways Restoration Resources

LOCATION

Auckland

LOCAL BOARD

Region wide

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Develop resources for Urban Waterways restoration including dynamic multimedia presentations.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Sustainable Coastlines aim to educate people of all ages, backgrounds and sectors, creating open-sourced resources and generating scientific data that motivates and equips communities to look after their coastlines.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

WMIF: 2013 $22,500

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$12,000

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$6,000

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$6,000

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Personnel costs for research and development of urban waterways restoration educational resources content, calls to action and core educational messages.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

20/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

7/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

2.5/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

76.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

81.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Sustainable Coastlines have a great track record of fostering environmental action around coastlines - particularly in relation to coastal clean-ups. They recognise the importance of working up catchments to educate and inform people about what is entering waterways, in the hope of changing behaviours. The resources developed for their Care for our Coast work are widely used and well regarded, so transferring that experience to their Care for our Water work is the next logical step. However it is recommended that the project be more focused on the Tamaki Estuary. That way the project contributes to a priority area from the Auckland Council perspective and builds on the work being done by a number of Local Boards around the estuary.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$6,000

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

Costs for research and development of urban waterways restoration educational resources content, calls to action and core educational messages.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Henderson Valley School

APPLICATION NO.

1198

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Planting Irrigation

LOCATION

389 Henderson Valley Road, Henderson

LOCAL BOARD

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Set up two water tanks and a connecting irrigation system in order to maintain the school's Native Identification Trail and orchard, and further encourage geckos, skinks and weta into this area.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Henderson Valley School is a Green Gold Enviro School providing education to students years 1-6.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2010 $500; 2009 $2,285; 2008 $3,187; 2007 $3,325

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$6,118.85

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$3,132.08

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,986.77

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Two rain water tanks and a connecting irrigation system for one of the tanks, materials to construct the tank and native trees and shrubs.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

22.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

4/10

Community awareness raising and education

4/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

76.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

81.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that this project be funded as it promotes and enhances both ecological and social outcomes, is feasible and realistic, and the applicants have a well established track record using EIF funds to effectively delivery projects. Furthermore, the outcomes of this project are long term and build on completed works to ensure the ongoing success of school wide Education for Sustainability revegetation and food production projects.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,986.77

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards tanks and pump and associated material.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Whangaparaoa College

APPLICATION NO.

1169

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Whangaparaoa College Rata Rd Wetlands

LOCATION

28 Bonita Avenue, Stanmore Bay

LOCAL BOARD

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Wetland planting and restoration for increasing the biodiversity of the area including decreasing stormwater run-off and improving the water quality, increasing the ecological sustainability of the wetlands.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Whangaparaoa College is a secondary school educating students Years 7-13. Through this project they aim to plant native plants along the school boundary and into the wetlands area to restore the ecological value of the area and create a buffer zone to the Auckland Council Rata Road Wetland Stormwater planting.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

REEF: 2013 $1,725

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$31,077.65

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$16,077.65

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$15,000.00

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Native plants and site preparation.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

20/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

8/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

76/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

81/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

This project restores an area of riparian vegetation alongside Rata Stream. One side of the stream has already been restored by Auckland Councils stormwater unit. The project will complete the remaining side. This site could be a good stepping stone along the Whangaparaoa Peninsula as part of the North West Wild link for wildlife to move across the landscape from Tiritiri Matangi and Shakespeare Regional Park, to the Waitakere Ranges.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$10,000

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution of $6,000 towards site preparation, and $4,000 towards native plants.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Hillpark School

APPLICATION NO.

1232

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Hillpark Enviro Project

LOCATION

57 Grande Vue Road, Manurewa

LOCAL BOARD

Manurewa Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Establish an edible garden, a covered teaching amphitheatre and an outdoor education area with native walks and traditional medicinal garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Hillpark School are a primary school who provide education to approximately 500 Year 1-6 students. Their focus for the coming years is to provide sustainable opportunities to learn a variety of life skills for students and the wider community through a world-class edible garden, orchard, and future bush development project and kaitiakitanga traditional medicine garden.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$46,007.43

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$31,007.43

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$15,000.00

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Garden construction costs including labour, ground levelling, cover and pavers, planting beds and overhead vine frame, soil and compost, hydroponic system, water harvesting, storage and irrigation systems, hoses, garden tools and gloves, glasshouse and benches, covered teaching area, worm farm, compost bins, native hedge plants for bush development and Kaitiakitanga medicinal garden.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

12.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

8/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

1/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

71.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

78.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Funding is recommended for this project. The learning space has huge potential not only for the students and their parents but also for other local schools and the wider school community. Relationships between community stakeholders will be strengthened and there is the possibility of long term education within the community. The relationship with local iwi will also be strengthened and will allow for knowledge sharing between iwi and school. The project is very well planned and the timeline is realistic. This project will make a significant impact on the school and the local community. The school has already made links with local businesses to request funding that will supplement the EIF funding. They have been proactive and there is huge support for the project throughout the school and by the principal and Board of Trustees.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$10,000

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards garden construction costs, worm farm, compost bins, native hedge plants for bush development and Kaitiakitanga medicinal garden.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1234

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Freemans Bay Playcentre - Water Capture System Grant Application (Environmental Sustainability Focus 2013-2014)

LOCATION

124 Wellington Street, Freemans Bay

LOCAL BOARD

Waitematā Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$5,019.35

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$2,509.85

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,509.50

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

4500L Capacity Corrugated Slimline Water Tank Installation, labour and material costs to install the tank on cobble pad, connect to down pipe and overflow with first flush system. Connect pump and pump cover, Davey Cartridge Filter, install x1 hose tap connected to Davey Pump and Yak Tek Tank level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,509.50

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards a water tank supply and installation.

 

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1252

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Laingholm Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

4 Lookout Drive, Laingholm

LOCAL BOARD

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2,860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$5,374.70

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$2,799.00

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,575.70

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

4500L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover. Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,575.70

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards a water tank supply and installation.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1245

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Balmoral Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

258 Balmoral Road, Balmoral

LOCAL BOARD

Albert-Eden Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$3,979

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$1,990

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$1,989

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

2380L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover. Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$1,989

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards a water tank supply and installation.

 

                                                                           


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1253

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Mangere Bridge Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

17 Domain Road, Mangere Bridge

LOCAL BOARD

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$6,038

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$3,094

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,944

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

4570L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover. Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,944

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards water tank supply and installation.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1254

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

New Windsor Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

64 Peter Buck Road, New Windsor

LOCAL BOARD

Whau Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2,860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$5,532

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$2,841

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,691

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

2380L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover, Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,691

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1255

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Newmarket Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

2 Hapua Street, Remuera

LOCAL BOARD

Orākei Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2,860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$5,353.25

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$2,677.25

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$2,676.00

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

4070L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover, Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$2,352.50

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards water tank supply and installation.

 


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Oaktree Kindergarten

APPLICATION NO.

1266

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Children's Forest Area

LOCATION

105 Oaktree Avenue, Browns Bay

LOCAL BOARD

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The children's forest area requires low growing native plants to encourage birds and other creatures into the play space allowing the children to explore and play creatively.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Oaktree Kindergarten are a not for profit - charitable trust  providing effective early childhood education services to ensure each child leaves the kindergarten with the foundations of personal development and a love of learning and life.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $1,500

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$2,408.24

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$1,320.00

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$1,088.24

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Native plants that will be suitable for this area non-toxic, hard-wearing, bird friendly, providing shade and to be used for cultural purposes like harakeke for weaving.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

12.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

6/10

Community awareness raising and education

6/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that this application be supported. The staff and community are very committed to providing a native natural environment to develop and foster the children’s connection to nature and teach them how to respect and nurture their environment in sustainable and positive ways.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$1,000

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards native plants of $700 and a contribution towards equipment and resources of $300.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Auckland Playcentres Association

APPLICATION NO.

1251

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Herne Bay Playcentre - Water Tank System

LOCATION

211 Jervois Road, Herne Bay

LOCAL BOARD

Waitematā Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

To install a water tank system to sustainably supply water play activities and garden.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Playcentre is a unique New Zealand wide organisation that has been dedicated to early childhood education for over 60 years. Playcentre is for children from birth to six years and there are no exclusions on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or disability.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities

COUNCIL FUNDING

EIF: 2012 $2860 (Onehunga playcentre)

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$6,186.75

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$3,183.00

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$3,003.75

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

3000L Capacity corrugated slimline water tank, installation for tank, connection of downpipe and overflow, 1 x hose tap, Davey water pump and pump cover. Davey filtration 3 x stage and level indicator.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

24/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

8/10

Good practice

8/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The proposal directly promotes environmental sustainability and encourages the implementation of positive environmental practices. Water collected will be used for water play and for edible gardens thus enhancing the local environment. The Playcentres Association are committed to being multicultural with all ethnic groups and cultures valued and working together to implement sustainable practices.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$3,003.75

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards a water tank supply and installation.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Bridget Fitzgerald

APPLICATION NO.

1175

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Tauhoa School Orchard - STAGE 2

LOCATION

15 Tauhoa Road, Tauhoa

LOCAL BOARD

Rodney Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Create an orchard with native shelter hedges on unused school land which is under grazed by sheep. This will provide students with abundant learning opportunities and fresh fruit.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Bridget Fitzgerald is a private individual applying on behalf of Tauhoa Primary School to develop a school orchard. The orchard project has the schools complete support and would be a valuable community resource.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

REEF: 2013 $2,000

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$3,741.5

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$1,881.36

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$1,860.14

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Plants for native hedge and fencing to provide stock protection.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

12.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

7/10

Community awareness raising and education

5/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

72.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

77.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

It is recommended that the school are given the amount of money requested to install the stock proof fence and hedging. There are multiple benefits to the local community and environment for this project including local food production, increased biodiversity / habitat for bees and butterflies and improved soil condition. Students will be involved with this project, and there are opportunities for the wider community to also take part.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$1,860.14

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards plants for a native hedge and fencing to provide stock protection.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Forrest Hill School

APPLICATION NO.

1134

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Water Tank

LOCATION

50 Forrest Hill Rd Forrest Hill Auckland

LOCAL BOARD

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Involve students in a sustainable educational project involving the reuse of water captured in the tank.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

Forrest Hill School is a primary school educating students Year 0-6.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

5/5

This application meets Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

WWF: 2011 $1238.13

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

0/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$2,091.00

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$1,045.50

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$1,045.50

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Water tank, tank stand, plumbing to divert guttering, hose, labour to build tank stand, siting tank and plumbing.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

12.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

6/10

Community awareness raising and education

5/10

Good practice

10/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

71.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

76.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Forrest Hill Primary is a long standing Enviroschool and works hard with their students around authentic issues that impact our environment. They like to look for solutions with their students to address these issues and then empower students to act on this information and knowledge. They have a good track record with Auckland Council, have accessed funding before and carried out projects successfully.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$1,045.50

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution towards water tank, tank stand, plumbing to divert guttering, hose, labour to build tank stand, siting tank and plumbing.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary

APPLICANT

Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust

APPLICATION NO.

1105

PROJECT BACKGROUND

TITLE

Howick Ward Eradication of Moth Plant Initiative

LOCATION

Various locations in South Auckland

LOCAL BOARD

Region wide

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project will educate the communities in Howick and the Eastern suburbs of South Auckland about using i-phones to track and eradicate moth plants. It will include a pamphlet drop to properties containing moth plant, and a summer student to undertake manual control of moth plant on properties and education of property owners.

APPLICANT BACKGROUND

The Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust work in the South Auckland community on a number of environmental, educational and beautification projects. The core business of the Trust is the eradication of graffiti in the South Auckland area.

OUTCOME AREA

Access, choice and opportunity

IS THIS A PRIORITY PROJECT

0/5

This application does not meet Education for Sustainability priorities.

COUNCIL FUNDING

N/A

FIRST TIME APPLICANT

2/2

RISK TO COUNCIL

 

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

TOTAL COST

$13,715.25

APPLICANT CONTRIBUTION

$6,870.25

OTHER PARTIES CONTRIBUTION

$0

AMOUNT REQUESTED

$6,845

DETAIL OF FUNDING REQUESTED

Cost of a horticultural student for a period of two months over the summer period, and partial costs of a leased vehicle.

APPLICATION ASSESSMENT

SCORING

 

Environmental impact and benefit

17.5/25

Feasibility and likelihood of success

30/30

Community involvement and participation

6/10

Community awareness raising and education

6/10

Good practice

7/10

Long term benefits

8/10

Recognising Māori perspectives

0/5

TOTAL ASSESSMENT SCORE

74.5/100

RANKED ASSESSMENT SCORE

76.5/107

ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

The main benefit of this project is that it has been co-designed by Auckland Council's Biosecurity team and aligns with current efforts of Council which are currently under-resourced to deal with this serious weed problem. Furthermore, the Manukau Beautification Trust has a proven track record of successfully delivering programmes (beautification, education, environmental management). Although this would essentially be funding for a pilot project, the Biosecurity team believes that once off the ground, this could serve as an effective model for other areas where moth-plant is considered a serious threat to native biodiversity.

FUNDING RECOMMENDED

$6,845

FUNDING RECOMMENDED FOR

A contribution of $1,340 towards van lease for 8 weeks, and $5,505 towards a horticulture student to deliver the project.


 

Environmental Initiatives Fund 2013 applicant assessment summary