I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Environment and Community Committee will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 12 September 2017

9.30am

Reception Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland

 

Environment and Community Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Penny Hulse

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Alf Filipaina

 

Members

IMSB Member James Brown

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

Cr Dick Quax

 

Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore

Cr Greg Sayers

 

Cr Ross Clow

Cr Desley Simpson, JP

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE

 

Cr Chris Darby

Cr Wayne Walker

 

Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO

Cr John Watson

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

IMSB Member Glenn Wilcox

 

Cr Richard Hills

 

 

Cr Denise Lee

 

 

Cr Mike Lee

 

 

(Quorum 11 members)

 

 

 

Tam White

Senior Governance Advisor

 

6 September 2017

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8156

Email: tam.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


 

Terms of Reference

Responsibilities

This committee deals with all strategy and policy decision-making that is not the responsibility of another committee or the Governing Body.  Key responsibilities include:

·         Development and monitoring of strategy, policy and action plans associated with environmental, social, economic and cultural activities

·         Natural heritage

·         Parks and reserves

·         Economic development

·         Protection and restoration of Auckland’s ecological health

·         Climate change

·         The Southern Initiative

·         Waste minimisation

·         Libraries

·         Acquisition of property relating to the committee’s responsibilities and within approved annual budgets

·         Performing the delegations made by the Governing Body to the former Parks, Recreation and Heritage Forum and Regional Development and Operations Committee, under resolution GB/2012/157 in relation to dogs

·         Activities of the following CCOs:

o    ATEED

o    RFA

Powers

(i)         All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities, including:

(a)        approval of a submission to an external body

(b)        establishment of working parties or steering groups.

(ii)         The committee has the powers to perform the responsibilities of another committee,    where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting of that other committee.

(iii)        The committee does not have:

(a)        the power to establish subcommittees

(b)        powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2)


Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

Members of the public

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

Those who are not members of the public

General principles

·         Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

·         Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

·         Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

·         In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

 

Members of the meeting

·         The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

·         However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

·         All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

·         Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

·         Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

 

Staff

·         All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

·         Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

 

Local Board members

·         Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain.  This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

·         Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation

 

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   7

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          7  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    7

5.1     Public Input - Stormwater Coalition - Bronwen Turner                                  7

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          8

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                                8

8          Notices of Motion                                                                                                          8

9          Strategic approach to Auckland's water                                                                    9

10        Progress report on the upgrade of the Safeswim programme                              11

11        Incorporating SeaChange objectives into Auckland Council group activity       19

12        A strategic framework for Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest)                              35

13        Submission to Productivity Commission’s Low  Emissions Economy Issues Paper 45

14        Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan                                                       49

15        Regional Sport and Recreation Grant Programme                                                 77

16        Te Whau Pathway Scheme Assessment Report                                                     93

17        Classification of a parcel of land at Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park, Puhoi         99

18        Classification of Putiki Reserve, Shelly Beach Road,Surfdale, Waiheke Island 111

19        Reserve classification of three parcels of land at 33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick 119

20        Approval of the Disability and Seniors Advisory Panels' 2017/2018 work programmes                                                                                                                                      129

21        Summary of Environment and Community Committee information memos and briefings - 12 September 2017                                                                                                    139  

22        Consideration of Extraordinary Items 

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

23        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               151

C1       Indicative Business Case - Whau Community Facilities                                       151

C2       Acquisition of land for open space - Drury                                                            151

C3       Acquisition of land for open space - Te Arai                                                         152  

 


1          Apologies

 

Apologies from Cr L Cooper and Cr M Lee have 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

 

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 8 August 2017, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          Petitions

 

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

 

 

5          Public Input

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day 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       Public Input - Stormwater Coalition - Bronwen Turner

Purpose

1.       Bronwen Turner of Stormwater Coalition will address the committee in relation to stormwater issues in the central isthmus and Meola Creek.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      thank Bronwen Turner for the presentation.

 


 

 

6          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 6.2 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 one (1) day’s 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 6.1 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

 

There were no notices of motion.

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Strategic approach to Auckland's water

 

File No.: CP2017/18756

 

Purpose

1.       To receive an update on the strategic approach to Auckland’s water outcomes.

Executive summary

2.       A priority of the Environment and Community Committee work programme for the current political term is to ensure that the right work is being undertaken to deliver high quality water outcomes for the Auckland region, particularly relating to water quality. 

3.       Over the coming months there will be a number of reports presented to the Environment and Community Committee that seek to progress improved water outcomes, including two reports at the 12 September 2017 meeting (one report on Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme, and one on SeaChange objectives).

4.       At the request of the Environment and Community Committee chair, staff will provide a presentation to set the scene for water outcomes in the Auckland region.

5.       Given the complexity of Auckland’s water issues and the level of stakeholder and public interest, this presentation will provide an overview of council’s integrated approach to water outcomes, and the current state of Auckland’s waters. The strategic context to the range of actions currently underway and in development to deliver high quality water outcomes will also be discussed.

Recommendation

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      receive the presentation on the strategic approach to Auckland’s water outcomes.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Signatories

Authors

Dave Allen – Acting Manager, Natural Environment Strategy

Andrew Chin – Healthy Waters Strategy and Resilience Manager

Authoriser

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Progress report on the upgrade of the Safeswim programme

 

File No.: CP2017/14841

 

Purpose

1.       To receive a progress update on the upgrade of Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme.

Executive summary

2.       Safeswim is Auckland Council’s programme for monitoring and reporting on water quality at Auckland’s bathing beaches. Although the current programme complies with national guidelines, those guidelines were set in 2003 and are now out of date.

3.       On 14 February 2017, the Environment and Community Committee received the findings of an independent review of the Safeswim programme (this report is available on the Auckland Council website). The committee endorsed the review’s recommendations and approved an upgrade of the Safeswim programme that shifts from weekly reporting of retrospective monitoring results to a forecasting approach that aligns with international best practice (resolution ENV/2017/11). The upgraded programme is scheduled to go live on 1 November 2017. 

4.       Auckland Council and Watercare have partnered with Surf Lifesaving Northern Region and the Auckland Regional Public Health Service to ensure the Safeswim upgrade provides comprehensive advice on beach safety. The approach adopted by Auckland Council exceeds the requirements of national guidelines and has been endorsed by the regional council sector as leading the way nationally.

5.       The upgrade is progressing well and is on track to meet the 1 November 2017 milestone for public launch. Once the upgraded Safeswim programme is in place:

·          The public will have year-round access to forecasts on water quality (via a website which will automatically update data), and up-to-date advice on other risks to beach safety (such as wind and wave conditions, and stinging jellyfish) at the 83[1] beaches currently included in the Safeswim programme (see Attachment A for a map showing the location of beaches covered by the Safeswim programme).

·          A ‘real-time’ alert function[2] will inform the public of unpredictable risk events as soon as they are detected (such as ’dry-weather’ sewage overflows or shark sightings).

·          The council group’s infrastructure and environmental managers will have a tool they can use to evaluate the effectiveness of different technical solutions for addressing water quality problems.

6.       Technical performance assessments prior to the launch have shown that Safeswim’s water quality predictions satisfy international benchmarks for accuracy, and are more effective at identifying risk than the current weekly monitoring programme (which complies with current national guidelines).

7.       Investment to support the continued improvement and extension of the Safeswim programme around the region will be part of ‘business as usual’ for council’s Healthy Waters department. The information generated by Safeswim – itself part of Auckland Council’s broader water management programme – may identify areas where new or additional investment is required via the Long-term Plan to improve water quality outcomes in Auckland’s rivers, estuaries, harbours and beaches.  

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      receive the progress update on the upgrade of the Safeswim programme.

Comments

Auckland Council’s Safeswim programme

8.       Water quality at Auckland beaches is generally good. However, on occasion and typically after rain, contaminants can impact water quality creating a potential risk to public health. This is caused primarily by:

·    stormwater infiltrating sewage systems causing diluted but untreated sewage to overflow into streams or directly to coastal areas

·    stormwater picking up contaminants as it flows over roads and land

·    localised sources of contamination (such as underperforming septic tank systems impacting lagoons on west coast beaches, the northern shores of the Manukau Harbour and Waiheke Island)

·    run-off from rural land.

9.       If water is contaminated with human or animal waste, accidental swallowing or inhaling seawater, or submerging cuts or other wounds in water may expose beach users to disease-causing bacteria.

10.     Public health records in Auckland do not effectively capture the actual impact on public health of exposure to water contaminated with wastewater overflows, but the potential risk of illness arising from exposure is well known. The Auckland Regional Public Health Service has recently noted an unexplained spike in gastroenteritis in Auckland, and is working with Auckland University, NIWA, Watercare and Auckland Council to investigate whether wastewater overflows following storm events could be a contributing factor.

11.     There will always be some level of risk associated with swimming at any given beach but the level of risk individuals are prepared to take will vary. One of Safeswim’s key objectives is to provide the public with information on potential risks to public health and safety at Auckland’s beaches. Once in place the upgraded Safeswim programme will provide forecasts of water quality and advice on beach safety over the summer season. This will allow Auckland beach users to ‘check before they swim’ and choose the beach that best fits their needs on a given day or time of day. 

12.     The information provided by Safeswim will also help Auckland Council and Watercare to work together to identify ‘hot-spots’, and focus on problems and apply different management actions for addressing them.

Background to the upgraded programme

13.     On 14 February 2017, the findings of the MartinJenkins Limited review of the Safeswim programme were presented to the Environment and Community Committee (full report is available on the Auckland Council website). Several improvements to the Safeswim programme were recommended through the report, including adopting a forecasting approach (underpinned by predictive models and high-frequency risk-based monitoring), providing evidence-based advice on risk levels, monitoring pathogens rather than indicator bacteria, and improving the way Safeswim information is communicated to the public.

 


 

 

14.     The Environment and Community Committee resolved as follows:

Resolution number ENV/2017/11

MOVED by Chairperson P Hulse, seconded by Cr D Simpson:

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      note the findings of the independent audit on Safeswim prepared by MartinJenkins Ltd.

b)      endorse the recommended improvements to the Safeswim programme, specifically;

i.     shift the programme from a weekly reporting of retrospective monitoring results to a validated modelling and forecasting approach by 1 November 2017, and

ii.     upgrade communication tools to include mobile reporting and active beach information signs.

c)    approve implementation of this initiative within existing budgets, including an initial capital investment of $325,000.

d)    request staff to prepare a report on costs and benefits associated with the ‘white box’ model proposed in the MartinJenkins Ltd report.

e)    forward this report and resolutions to all Local Boards and the Independent Māori Statutory Board for their information and their assistance with awareness.

15.     In response to resolution b) above, the Safeswim programme is being upgraded as detailed later in this report. Resolution d) above will be addressed once monitoring data from the first swim season has been obtained, which will allow a comparison of the original and updated models against their respective costs.

Improvements to the Safeswim programme

Transitioning to water quality forecasts

16.     Water quality forecasts work in a similar way to weather forecasts. They draw on environmental variables, such as rainfall, wind and tides to predict the concentration of indicator bacteria in beach water. The upgraded Safeswim programme will use models – validated by targeted monitoring – because they are regarded internationally as the best way to help the public safeguard their health.

17.     Prior to commencing the Safeswim upgrade, Auckland Council reviewed approaches to beach monitoring and reporting adopted in the North America, Europe and Asia. The tools that will be used in the upgraded Safeswim programme are well tested internationally. This approach is leading the field in New Zealand and the rest of the country is watching Auckland’s leadership in this space. For example, a position paper on recreational water quality monitoring and reporting prepared for the New Zealand regional sector by Environment Canterbury, Hawkes Bay Regional Council and NIWA, has referred to the Safeswim upgrade as a leading example to the rest of the country of how to improve water quality monitoring and reporting.

18.     To ensure the upgraded Safeswim programme is robust and that Safeswim’s modelled predictions and forecasts of water quality satisfy international benchmarks for accuracy, Auckland Council has formed an independent panel of nationally and internationally regarded experts to review the technical aspects of the programme.

Advising the public of unpredictable overflows

19.     Models are developed to predict changes in beach water quality caused by changes in environmental variables. They are not able to predict unusual events, such as sewage overflows due to network disruptions.


 

 

20.     To ensure the public is made aware of events that effect water quality as soon as they arise, Watercare has agreed to provide the Safeswim programme with ‘real time’ data from the overflow sensors at its transmission stations. Healthy Waters and Watercare have begun to install remote sensors downstream of eight key engineered overflow points on the wastewater network. Healthy Waters and Watercare have committed to extend this pilot and install an additional 100-120 remote sensors downstream of engineered overflow points on the wastewater network by 1 November 2018.

Building partnerships to deliver integrated health and safety advice

21.     Water quality is important but it is only one aspect of beach safety. Wind and wave conditions, tides and currents, and the presence of marine animals such as stinging jellyfish and sharks can, at times, make it unsafe to swim. 

22.     Auckland Council has partnered with Surf Lifesaving Northern Region and the Auckland Regional Public Health Service to provide the public with integrated advice on beach safety through the Safeswim programme. The involvement of these organisations will allow Auckland Council to provide timely warnings and advice on the full range of risks to beach users’ health and safety.

23.     Following feedback from mana whenua, the project team has commenced work on a system for notifying the public of rāhui (prohibitions) following deaths or disturbance of kōiwi (remains of ancestors). The objective is to add this function to the Safeswim programme in time for the 2017/2018 summer season. The requirement to consult with government agencies that have responsibilities in this area may delay progress and push-back the launch of this function to the 2018/2019 summer season. 

Focus on continual improvement

24.     As part of the Safeswim upgrade, the previous programme of weekly helicopter-based monitoring has been replaced with targeted sampling of beach water quality at times and locations known to be associated with water quality issues (such as downstream of engineered overflow points on the wastewater network, and during and after heavy rainfall events). The data this generates has been used to validate and improve the predictive accuracy of models, and provides much more detailed insight into the source and cause of problems. This approach will continue to be used by Safeswim after the launch of the upgraded programme on 1 November 2017, and will drive continual improvement in the accuracy of water quality forecasts.   

25.     Prior to upgrading the Safeswim programme, the council’s Research Investigation and Monitoring Unit surveyed over 1000 Aucklanders to build an understanding of the baseline level of awareness of the current programme, and to gain insight into the behavioural patterns of Aucklanders. This work revealed a very low level of awareness of the programme and highlighted that there is not yet a culture in Auckland of checking water quality prior to swimming.

26.     This survey will be repeated at the end of the 2017/2018 summer season, and the results used to indicate necessary refinements and additions to the programme’s design.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27.     Local boards were informed of the upgrades to the Safeswim programme through a memo circulated in August 2017. Following the circulation of this memo, the project team received several requests from local board members to extend the scope of the Safeswim programme to include additional sites. There will be an opportunity to extend the scope of beaches included in the programme after the 2017/2018 summer swimming season.

 

28.     The project team expects that upgrades to the Safeswim programme will result in an increased frequency of public health and safety warnings at Auckland’s beaches. Staff will engage directly with local boards to discuss and agree the mechanism by which issues and their implications are advised to communities, and there will continue to be opportunities for local board members to be involved in the programme’s implementation and continued improvement.

29.     A detailed information pack will be circulated to elected members prior to the upgraded programme’s launch. There will be an opportunity for members to attend more detailed briefings prior to the programme’s launch, should they wish to have more information.

Māori impact statement

30.     The upgraded Safeswim programme will provide mana whenua kaitiaki with accurate and timely advice on potential risks to health and safety at Auckland’s beaches, improving the evidence-base for their decision-making.

31.     The project team has briefed the Watercare Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum (May and July 2017), the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Hui (July 2017), and the Independent Māori Statutory Board (July 2017). This engagement has ensured that mana whenua representatives are well-informed of the issues that prompted the independent review of the Safeswim programme, and provided an opportunity for mana whenua to influence the programme’s design.

32.     Mana whenua representatives were generally supportive of the revised Safeswim programme. They consistently expressed a desire for a tool to more effectively communicate rāhui (prohibitions), and requested accurate advice on the health risks associated with harvesting shellfish from Auckland’s beaches for consumption.

Implementation

33.     Further updates to the Environment and Community Committee will be provided in October, November and December 2017, and again in February and March 2018. At the March 2018 briefing, staff will provide the committee with the outcomes of a review of the effectiveness of the upgraded Safeswim programme following its first summer season, and recommend any necessary refinements and/or additions to the programme.

34.     Investment in the Safeswim programme will be treated as business as usual for council’s Healthy Waters department. The information generated by Safeswim – itself part of Auckland Council’s broader water management programme – may identify areas where new or additional investment is required via the Long-term Plan to improve water quality outcomes in Auckland’s rivers, estuaries, harbours and beaches.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Map of beaches covered by Safeswim programme

17

     

Signatories

Authors

Craig Mcilory – General Manager Healthy Waters

Grant Barnes – General Manager Licensing and Compliance

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Penny Pirrit - Director Regulatory Services

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Incorporating SeaChange objectives into Auckland Council group activity

 

File No.: CP2017/18665

 

Purpose

1.       To provide further analysis of the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan and a proposed Auckland Council group work programme relating to the shared vision to improve coastal outcomes in the Hauraki Gulf.

2.       To approve terms of reference and membership for the Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group to oversee the proposed work programme of the Auckland Council group.

Executive summary

3.       The SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan (the plan) (www.seachange.org.nz) was publicly released on 6 December 2016, following its development by an independent Stakeholder Working Group over the preceding three years. The plan is a non-statutory document and has been referred to key agencies for their consideration. The plan has been summarised into ‘An Introduction and Overview’[3] document with 16 broad themes.

4.       The plan’s broad vision is to ensure that the Hauraki Gulf is vibrant with life, its mauri strong, productive, and supports healthy and prosperous communities. This aligns with Auckland Council’s own goals for the coastal marine area of the Auckland region.

5.       An Auckland Council Evaluation Group (the evaluation group) was established in February 2017, consisting of senior staff from a variety of council departments and council controlled organisations. The evaluation group undertook a high-level evaluation of the plan’s vision and objectives in light of the role and responsibilities of the Auckland Council group (being the council and initially three council controlled organisations).

6.       The evaluation group reported its initial findings to the Planning Committee in May 2017 (CP2017/00075). Building on that initial report, this report provides a response to the Planning Committee resolutions (PLA/2017/50), including a proposed (and prioritised) work programme out to 2028 and evaluation of funding and timing. The work programme shows how the group can embed the plan’s objectives into a work programme of both existing and new initiatives. It also shows how these initiatives complement each other in delivering the plan’s objectives within council’s responsibilities.

7.       Delivery of aspects of the proposed work programme that require additional funding will be dependent on Long-term Plan 2018-2028 decisions.

8.       An Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group has been established (PLA/2017/50). The proposed terms of reference for this group can be found at Attachment B for consideration and approval. The purpose of the group is to provide oversight of the Auckland Council group’s work programme, and to integrate Auckland Council’s work programme with other relevant agencies and the Hauraki Gulf Forum.


 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve the proposed work programme as council’s initial response to addressing the objectives identified by SeaChange;

b)      approve the terms of reference and membership of the Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group to ensure that Hauraki Gulf outcomes are further embedded in the work programme of the Auckland Council group.

Comments

Background

9.       The evaluation group reported an initial assessment of the SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf marine spatial plan (the plan) to the Planning Committee on 2 May 2017 (CP2017/00075).

10.     The Planning Committee (PLA/2017/50) acknowledged the shared vision and intent of the plan and Auckland Council’s goals, which both seek to improve the health of the Gulf. The committee also directed that the council group report to the Environment and Community Committee within four months on:

a)   how to implement the plan, including additional analysis of the implications for the council group, including the extent to which existing work programmes implement the plan;

b)   a proposed work programme of activities consistent with the outcomes envisaged by the plan, and within Auckland Council’s statutory responsibilities, including prioritisation, funding and timing;

c)   options for where actions could be delivered in collaboration with other agencies that share similar goals and responsibilities, including the role of the Hauraki Gulf Forum;

d)   consideration of these updated and proposed work programmes for incorporation into the Auckland Council long-term plan 2018-2028 and other relevant processes and opportunities;

e)   terms of reference for a SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan Political Reference Group.

Implications and evaluation of proposed work programme of Auckland council group

11.     The evaluation group found several issues with the plan, as initially reported to the Planning Committee. Many of the plan’s objectives have relatively short timeframes for recommended implementation, and their staging does not take account of several other factors (eg, funding).

12.     Staff from a range of council departments and council controlled organisations were involved in four theme-based workshops (infrastructure, access; water; governance/community input and biodiversity/biosecurity). The workshops were used to assess the objectives of the plan against current and planned council activities and consider how to fund and prioritise these. Following the workshops, a subsequent integration meeting was held. Further cross-council group work was done through August 2017 to finalise the proposed work programme and indicative timeframe included as Attachment A. The highest priorities for the Auckland Council group are marine debris, sediment, nutrients, heavy metals, microbial pathogens, and risks and threats to water quality (ie. themes 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 respectively).

13.     From a funding perspective, the evaluation group assessed the plan’s objectives against current council group activities and work programmes, and also against proposals planned for inclusion into the Long-term Plan (2018-2028) process.

 

14.     Council can implement the objectives of the plan in several ways. For objectives where council has a clear statutory responsibility, these activities can be prioritised within funding and resourcing constraints. For objectives where there is a shared responsibility, council can work in partnership with central government agencies to deliver shared outcomes. And where council does not have direct responsibility, council may still have a role to advocate to central government or other organisations / bodies, or contribute within its statutory responsibilities.

Options for working collaboratively with agencies who share similar goals and responsibilities

15.     Waikato Regional Council has carried out a similar evaluation exercise, and a representative attended selected evaluation group workshops. There is potential to work together on the plan’s implementation, particularly where there is alignment on objectives.

16.     Waikato Regional Council staff presented a report on plan implementation to its Strategy and Policy Committee on 27 June 2017. This committee endorsed the draft implementation plan to inform the Waikato Regional Council long-term plan processes. The Committee requested staff to advise the four territorial authorities within their region of the concerns of councillors about the costs of implementation, and in particular the significant costs related to science and research. A letter was sent to Thames Coromandel, Hauraki, Matamata-Piako and Waikato district councils seeking their feedback.

17.     Two responses received by Waikato Regional Council (Hauraki, Waikato) acknowledged some alignment with existing activities, and signalled that many of the initiatives would be considered regional council responsibility. Thames Coromandel District Council has earlier stated that they see the plan as an information tool for consideration in its own strategic planning.

18.     Collaboration with central government agencies is required to support the aspirations of local government and the community. Where councils are responsible for implementation of central government policy, collaboration is an important component of ensuring that the goals of both agencies are met.

19.     Central government agencies (Department of Conservation; Ministry of Primary Industries) were invited to participate in Auckland Council workshops, but they elected not to participate. In essence, it is the understanding of council staff that Ministers are considering how the plan will be advanced alongside the range of planned central government initiatives. How the plan outcomes will be incorporated into central government programmes is unlikely to be known before the formation of a new government in late 2017.

20.     Central government is likely to want to consider the relative merits of particular approaches (including the respective costs and benefits) in order to achieve the stated vision for the Hauraki Gulf. This uncertainty over central government’s integration of the plan into their work programmes does not unnecessarily hinder the work programme of councils, given their primary statutory responsibilities, as distinct from central government.

21.     Mana whenua engagement will be a feature across a range of these initiatives. Departments and council controlled organisations will work with mana whenua to identify how they should be involved in shaping individual work programmes, and how that links with common themes and objectives. Regular kaitiaki forums between council and mana whenua representatives will also be used to further engage.


 

 

22.     The plan broadly supports participation of the community in seeing their aspirations met. There is a wide range of interests who would be affected by the objectives or direction that the plan wishes to take and further engagement would be appropriate. Any future governance reforms affecting administration of the Hauraki Gulf will need to take account of various statutory and non-statutory considerations, and provide for some transition, including consideration of any impacts on agency work programmes. There are also other relationships to consider, including linkages between council controlled organisations and community groups, philanthropic groups, and regional contracts managed by Community Facilities etc.

23.     The plan calls for further research to be done, but also greater coordination of efforts. The Research and Evaluation Unit have noted that they can play a lead role in coordinating research across the Hauraki Gulf under a research hub initiative.

 

Role of the Hauraki Gulf Forum

24.     The Hauraki Gulf Forum is representative of political interests from a local board, district, regional and central government perspective, and includes mana whenua representation. The Hauraki Gulf Forum can reflect on the constraints and opportunities of constituent parties as they consider how to embed better ways of fulfilling their own statutory responsibilities, while also considering the requirements of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000.

25.     Hauraki Gulf Forum members can support constituent parties who request a level of political support when significant changes may be required, or where central government initiatives may need to draw on a common response. The Hauraki Gulf Forum could constructively complement the objectives of its constituent agencies where these align.

Consideration of the proposed work programme in the Long-term Plan 2018-2028

26.     Various council departments are currently canvassing what opportunities there may be to highlight the objectives of SeaChange, as expressed through the proposed work programme of the Auckland Council group, in preparatory work being undertaken for the Long-term Plan 2018-2028. Several of these initiatives relate to infrastructure and marine ecological health, with water quality outcomes being a high priority.

27.     There is already funding available through existing activities to encompass several of the objectives, but additional funding would be required to enhance activities for several objectives. The level of likely additional funding is difficult to estimate on the basis of information supplied by departments and some council controlled organisations over recent months. However with further investigation, benefits can be properly assessed. In addition, from a capital works programme perspective, approved Asset Management Programmes set out the longer term infrastructure investment that should better address growth and environmental outcomes in an integrated way. By way of example, Watercare’s 20 year investment for major projects facing the Hauraki Gulf such as various interceptors, pumping stations and sewage plant upgrades equates to over $1.5 billion.

Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group

28.     The Planning Committee meeting of 2 May 2017 resolved to form an Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group, with a view to approving a terms of reference and membership at this meeting. The Political Reference Group met for the first time on 2 August 2017, where evaluation group staff provided an overview of the work undertaken since 2 May 2017. The following members attended: included Councillors Hulse, Filipaina, Cashmore, Darby, Walker, Independent Maori Statutory Board member Liane Ngamane, and Local Board representation from Mr John Meeuwsen.

29.     Members indicated that the Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group would be a useful forum to canvass issues in further detail, on a periodic basis, particularly given the need to see further integration of environmental outcomes within the council group.

30.     The proposed terms of reference for the Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group is included in Attachment B. Membership reflects the mix of councillors from two committees (Environment and Community, Planning), the Deputy Mayor, local board representation, and an Independent Maori Statutory Board member. At least four of these members are also on the Hauraki Gulf Forum.

31.     As set out in the proposed terms of reference, this group would serve two broad purposes:

a)   to provide oversight and guidance to Auckland Council group activities focusing on prioritisation and integration of the work programme and outcomes;

b)   to, where possible, integrate the Auckland Council group work programme with the work programme of other agencies in the Hauraki Gulf and the Hauraki Gulf Forum.

32.     Many activities that the council group undertakes are of benefit to the coastal area across the Auckland region. While the focus on the Hauraki Gulf remains a priority given the range of prevailing issues in this coastal marine area, there is also value in recognising that various initiatives also apply to other catchments and coastal environments. An emphasis on the Hauraki Gulf is appropriate given the competing interests and pressures on the area and the range of objectives that have been identified for consideration.

Next Steps

33.     The evaluation undertaken and associated efforts to integrate the council group activities has led to the high level work programme outlined in Attachment A. This is not necessarily an exhaustive list of activities, but it is illustrative of a broad range of departmental and council controlled activities that influence Hauraki Gulf outcomes. The work programme is intended to facilitate further discussions within the council group and other agencies, as the long-term plan is finalised in 2018, and as other initiatives progress.

34.     Further collaboration opportunities can be explored as third parties are involved and funding arrangements over the medium term have more certainty. A balance between outcomes and funding will need to be found.

35.     The Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group is likely to need technical support at its meetings by the relevant planning and operational departments and council controlled organisations. Those with most influence on development and growth outcomes are best placed to contribute. Staff from Plans and Places, Development Programme Office, Auckland Transport, Watercare Services Ltd, Healthy Waters, Research and Evaluation Unit (RIMU), and Environmental Services could best serve this role, with others called in as required.

36.     Other than the oversight of Auckland Council group activity against the work programme, the Auckland Council SeaChange – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Political Reference Group may wish to undertake or respond to high level liaison with central government and other agencies, and the Hauraki Gulf Forum. Ultimately any council position with significant implications for council responsibility will rest with the governing body and the relevant council committees.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

37.     A memo outlining the high level staff analysis of the plan was provided to all local board members in June 2017. Staff committed to would further outlining the council group work programme assessment process to the regional cluster local board meetings in July. Council staff provided a presentation at meetings in Manukau, the city centre, and Takapuna.

38.     Staff noted that the overview provided could help inform local board members in their consideration of local board plans or other initiatives which may reflect the objectives of the plan, as appropriate. Furthermore, many initiatives for local boards are developed in conjunction with council departments and council controlled organisations. Further opportunities for local boards should become apparent through their on-going liaison and implementation of initiatives at a local scale.

Rural Advisory Panel briefing

39.     The Rural Advisory Panel was briefed on the plan on 5 May 2017. This covered an introduction to the plan’s content, the assessment and analysis at that time and the next steps for the plan’s evaluation. Several Panel members expressed concerns that the objectives were not well grounded. This view is consistent with previous evaluation group advice to the Planning Committee. Panel members further observed that input from the rural sector had been limited during the plan’s development.

Māori impact statement

40.     High level staff analysis of the plan was sent to mana whenua representatives in July 2017. The memo invited Auckland region mana whenua representatives to contact council staff should they wish to discuss the council evaluation of the plan. One mana whenua representative took up the opportunity. Another representative noted their appreciation for the opportunity being extended to Auckland region mana whenua.

41.     Matauranga Maori and the perspective of mana whenua were woven throughout the plan, reflecting the holistic view and interrelationships that Maori and the broader community have with the coastal environment. Bringing together the council group’s existing and proposed work programme, as it can deliver on the shared goal of improving the Hauraki Gulf and other coastal environments, is in itself an example of the more integrated approach to resource management. The on-going challenge will be to translate this into operational approaches, while still being effective and efficient in delivery. Where this approach is further applied, particularly in the context of regional growth, decisions are likely to be more robust and transparent, as it affects or enhances the values and aspirations of Maori.

42.     Given that the council work programme would benefit the Auckland region, beyond the Hauraki Gulf, it is proposed to inform mana whenua of the potential reach of these benefits to other coastal waters of the Auckland region.

43.     The Crown’s policy for harbour settlements explicitly records a commitment to reaching a settlement in Hauraki Gulf waters, and to enter negotiations for that purpose. The timeframe for this initiative is at least two years away. Council staff consider that it could be desirable for the council to be involved in initial settlement discussions, as it is more likely to promote the council having a stake in the design or outcomes of settlements.

Implementation

44.     The nature and extent of the council group’s work programme for coastal outcomes is dependent on funding, but also on how well growth and development activities are integrated with environmental outcomes. There will need to be further consideration on mechanisms to fund specific outcomes (eg, targeted rates or levies). Departments and council controlled organisations will need to consider and initiate these discussions, consistent with the broader agreed work programme.

45.     The first major opportunity to consider funding and reprioritisation to better integrate outcomes envisaged by the plan and other programmes is the Long-term Plan (2018 – 2028). Preparatory work for various initiatives has been advanced for such consideration.

46.     Departments and council controlled organisations will look to collaborate further with third party activities as and when identified. Timelines and staging will be dependent on relevant work programmes and availability of resources by the parties involved.

47.     Periodic review by the Auckland Council Coastal Political Reference Group will enable an assessment of the work programme and the approach to staging any work, and any remedies necessary to progress work programmes within available resources.

 

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Council Group proposed works programme

27

b

Proposed Terms of Reference

31

     

Signatories

Authors

Dave Allen, Acting Manager, Natural Environment Strategy Unit

Nick Reid - Senior Analyst - Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques  Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

A strategic framework for Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest) 

 

File No.: CP2017/18710

 

Purpose

1.       To approve the proposed strategic framework for Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest).

Executive summary

2.       Auckland is changing rapidly, undergoing population growth, increased urbanisation and greater intensification. With such change, the provision and protection of urban green space becomes increasingly essential to counteract the associated pressures of these changes and to maintain the value proposition for urban living. 

3.       Drawing from existing plans and strategies like the Auckland Plan, Auckland Growing Greener and Low Carbon Auckland and identifying a critical strategic gap, staff from across the council family have been developing a strategy for the provision and protection of this urban green space – Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest). 

4.       Staff have developed the proposed framework in collaboration with mana whenua, with input from three local board cluster workshops and a workshop with the Environment and Community Committee.

5.       The proposed framework consists of a vision, three main objectives (knowing, growing and protecting) with eight outcomes, two key mechanisms to deliver these objectives and outcomes (engagement and management), and a set of nine supporting principles.

6.       Staff have also developed a draft list of key implementation actions.  Further engagement and consultation with mana whenua and local boards will be planned to refine and finalise these key actions and to develop an accompanying implementation plan for inclusion in a full draft of the strategy.

7.       To date, the working group has engaged internally with Community Facilities, Environmental Services (Healthy Waters and Biodiversity teams), Parks Services and Auckland Transport. Further engagement with these teams and the wider council family is required to analyse the opportunities and challenges as part of development of the implementation actions.

8.       The intention is to present a full draft of the strategy, based on the approved framework, to the Environment and Community Committee by December 2017.  

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve the proposed framework of the strategy for Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest) consisting of a vision, objectives, outcomes, mechanisms to deliver these outcomes and supporting principles.

b)      note that staff have been developing a list of key actions and an implementation plan as part of the strategy and will continue engagement with mana whenua and local boards to refine and finalise these, with an intention to present a full draft of the strategy to the Environment and Community Committee by December 2017.   

 

 


 

 

Comments

Background and process to date

9.       Auckland’s urban ngahere is defined as the network of all trees, other vegetation and green roofs – both native and naturalised – in existing and future urban areas[4]. An urban forest provides a wide range of evidence-based benefits including community health and well-being benefits, environmental benefits, cultural benefits and economic benefits. A majority of Aucklanders stand to gain in some way from these benefits since most of Aucklanders live, work and play in the urban context. 

10.     Auckland is undergoing a rapid rate of change with potential impacts to Auckland’s urban ngahere. Pressures like rapid population growth and urbanisation are at the forefront, but so are changes to the Resource Management Act (2015), ongoing challenges with weed and pest control, the threat of diseases such as kauri dieback and myrtle rust, and potential future challenges caused by climate change.  The benefits of an urban forest are increasingly essential in counteracting the associated pressures of growth and change in urban Auckland.

11.     While existing plans, policies, strategies and guidelines make reference to Auckland’s urban ngahere and green spaces, they do not provide an integrated and long term vision or a clear and coherent management framework for them.  Existing planting initiatives are also not guided by an agreed strategic approach or long term vision.

12.     Given these drivers and acknowledgement of a strategic gap staff from across the council family began developing a strategy for urban ngahere provision and protection in July 2016. Work drew from existing plans and strategies like the Auckland Plan, Auckland Growing Greener, the Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy and Low Carbon Auckland and began to fill the strategic gap in the coordinated provision and protection of Auckland’s urban ngahere (forest) and the contribution to implementation of national and regional environmental policies and strategies like the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management.

13.     Background research commenced as did the development of a framework for the strategy, consisting of a vision, principles, key objectives and outcomes. Strategies and assistance from international cities, like those in the C40 Cities network, informed the development of the proposed framework of the strategy. 

Mana Whenua Engagement

14.     Council organised two workshops with mana whenua, attended by Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Whanaunga and Ngāti Paoa, and a separate meeting with NgaiTai Ki Tamaki.  Engagement was used to develop the vision and framework for the strategy.

15.     Iwi management plans formed the basis for the first mana whenua engagement workshop (June 2017), which began to develop a shared vision, principles, and high level objectives with potential outcomes.  Key feedback from iwi in attendance (Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāti Whanaunga) included support for the development of a strategic approach, a preference for the use of native species in the absence of strong rationale for the contrary, a desire for the use of wording and visuals recognised by mana whenua, and recognition of the value of the urban ngahere for holistic individual and community wellbeing.


 

 

16.     A second mana whenua workshop (August 2017), attended by Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Whanaunga and Ngāti Paoa, helped further develop the proposed framework for the strategy and the vision, resulting in the proposed shared vision statement and general support for the principles, objectives, outcomes and key mechanisms to deliver these outcomes. Key feedback included the importance to recognise the partnership between iwi and council in the strategy, that the wording of the principle ‘preference for natives’ is not strong enough to reflect mana whenua views for the use of natives in the absence of a strong rationale for the contrary, a suggestion to replace ‘urban forest’ with ‘urban ngahere’ and a clear interest in future discussions on how the proposed framework of the strategy could be delivered in partnership with mana whenua.    

17.     A separate meeting with Ngai tai ki Tamaki (August 2017) provided additional feedback, including: consideration of the proposed timeline of the strategy (e.g. what is ‘long term’), consideration of the connectivity between rural and urban areas, the observation that Auckland currently only has forest remnants, and the need for green infrastructure in the city.   

Elected Member Workshops

18.     A draft framework was presented to councillors at a workshop with the Environment and Community Committee on 14 June 2017. Support was expressed for developing a strategic approach for managing Auckland’s urban ngahere and feedback on the objectives, outcomes, mechanisms, and supporting principles were incorporated into the proposed framework of the strategy.

19.     Staff presented the initiative to local board advisors in February 2017 and a draft framework to local board chairs in August 2017. Three local board cluster workshops (south, central, northwest) were held in August 2017 to receive feedback from local boards to incorporate into the proposed framework of the strategy.

Overview of the framework for the strategy

20.     The proposed strategic framework consists of a vision, three main objectives (knowing, growing and protecting) with eight outcomes, two key mechanisms to deliver these objectives and outcomes (engagement and management), and a set of nine supporting principles (figure 1).

 

Proposed principles

 

1.   Plant the right tree in the right place

2.   A preference for native species

3.   Ensure urban forest diversity

4.   All residents have access to urban forest

5.   Create ecological corridors and connectivity

6.   Protect mature, healthy trees

7.   Address urban forest on public and private land

8.   Deploy regulatory and non-regulatory tools

9.   Manage the whole life-cycle of urban trees

An explanation of these principles is provided in Attachment A.

 

Vision

21.     The proposed vision statement developed in collaboration with mana whenua is:

 

 “Together, growing Auckland’s urban ngahere for a flourishing future”.

 

Key objectives and outcomes

22.     The proposed objectives and outcomes for Auckland’s urban ngahere are:

 

Objective

Outcomes

Knowing

·    Better understanding of the status & trends on private and public land.

 

·    Better understanding the diverse values and benefits of Auckland’s urban forest.

 

·    Better understanding of existing and future risks and pressures.

Growing

·    Increase in the average canopy cover across the region.

 

·    Increased resilience to existing and future pressures.

Protecting

·    No net loss of canopy cover at the scale of local board areas.

 

·    No loss of percentage of trees larger than 10 metres.

 

·    No net loss of notable trees.

Engagement and management

23.     Engagement and management are identified as the two key mechanisms to deliver the outcomes under the three key objectives. Key outcomes related to these mechanisms are:

 

Mechanism

Outcomes

Engagement

·    A well-established community engagement programme.

 

·    Increased public awareness of the values and benefits of Auckland’s urban ngahere.

Management

·    Increased survival rate of new plantings and sustainability of Auckland’s urban ngahere.

 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

24.     Local boards, and in particular the Waitematā Local Board, have been a main driver for developing a strategic approach for Auckland’s urban ngahere.

25.     Local board views were gained from presentations to local board advisors and local board chairs and three local board cluster workshops. Key feedback included:

·    Acknowledgement of the importance of having a strategic approach and support for the presented draft framework with minor changes (e.g. include a reference to ecosystem services provided by Auckland’s urban forest such as ecological corridors)

·    The need to integrate the strategy with other strategies and policies (e.g. those related to the road corridor being developed by Auckland Transport) and existing planting initiatives (e.g. the Mayor’s Million Trees Programme)

·    The importance of ensuring that the responsibility for delivery of the proposed outcomes is not fully transferred to local boards; that there is a need for regional support and commitment

·    The importance of addressing the unequal distribution of Auckland’s urban ngahere (e.g. big differences between local board areas)

·    The importance to acknowledge cultural values in different areas to ensure the strategy aligns

·    Recognition that not everyone wants more trees and that the urban forest can interfere with infrastructure functioning.

26.     Council staff have been developing a list of key actions to deliver the strategy and an associated implementation plan and will be working with local boards (and mana whenua) to further develop and refine these actions and implementation.

27.     Local boards may wish to draw on the strategy to develop their own specific approaches to urban forest protection, provision and management, particularly given different local contexts (e.g., canopy cover), local needs (e.g., more emphasis on protection than provision in local boards with higher canopy cover) and local funding requirements.

Māori impact statement

28.     The vision and framework of Auckland's Urban Forest Strategy has been developed in collaboration with Mana Whenua as partners. This has resulted in their direct input into the Strategy’s vision and key outcomes, thus enabling council to apply Te Ao Maori principles into the design and implementation of the strategy.  This will result in the recognition and application of Matauranga Maori when operationalising the Strategy.

Implementation

29.     Council staff developed a list of draft key implementation actions to deliver the proposed framework and anticipate working with mana whenua and local boards to further develop these actions.

30.     The vision covers Auckland’s urban ngahere on both private and public land. With 60% of the Auckland’s urban ngahere located on private land (and 40% on public land), council staff acknowledge that council has limited to no control over the larger part of Auckland’s urban forest. We endeavor to develop actions to influence the private land owners to support the vision. Staff will prepare cost-benefit analyses of identified actions to manage Auckland’s urban ngahere on private and public land and will report back to the Environment and Community Committee as part of the full strategy.

31.     Council staff will ensure that the Long-term Plan process includes consideration of funding to deliver on this strategy.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Proposed principles

41

     

Signatories

Authors

Parin Thompson - Principal Specialist Sustainability & Climate Mitigation

Sietse Bouma - Principal Specialist Envirnmntl Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques  Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Submission to Productivity Commission’s Low  Emissions Economy Issues Paper

 

File No.: CP2017/18296

 

Purpose

1.       To seek endorsement of the proposed key themes for submission to the Productivity Commission’s low emissions economy issues paper and to request delegated authority to the Environment and Community Committee Chair and Deputy Chair to review and approve council’s final submission.

Executive summary

2.       The Productivity Commission released its low emissions economy issues paper in August with a deadline for response by 2 October 2017[5]. The purpose of this inquiry is to identify options for how New Zealand could reduce its domestic greenhouse gas emissions while continuing to grow incomes and wellbeing. 

3.       The Auckland region is responsible for around 20% of New Zealand’s emissions and Auckland Council has committed to a 40% reduction by 2040 through the Auckland Plan and Low Carbon Auckland. As such, the policy direction set by central government has a direct impact on Auckland’s ability to meet our commitments and vice versa.

 

4.       The wider council family is developing a joint submission, which will address 40 questions related to a variety of sectors, industries and emissions sources. Due to time constraints and the fact that submission will be prior to the October Environment and Community Committee, this report seeks endorsement of the three over-arching themes that will direct the submission and for final approval of the full submission to be delegated to the Chair and Deputy Chair.

5.       The three proposed key themes as identified by the wider council family are:

a.   Central government to provide strong leadership to support New Zealand’s transition to a low emissions future. The establishment of a clear mandate provides business and local government with the confidence to make long-term investment decisions. It is recommended that this encompasses the establishment of a clear emissions baseline, the setting of policies and legally binding targets, identification of support and financing mechanisms and monitoring of progress.

 

b.   New Zealand’s cities are a key part of the transition to a low emissions future. To deliver on both national and regional targets, central and local government need to work in partnership. Current and future growth provides both clear challenges and potential opportunities to deliver substantial emissions reductions while realising economic, social and environmental benefits.

 

c.   To deliver emissions reductions and build resilience in New Zealand’s economy, we recommend an integrated approach that seeks to deliver multiple outcomes. A sustainable transition to a low emissions economy requires a coordinated and joined-up approach to ensure that our economy remains competitive into the future.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      endorse the key themes to the Productivity Commission’s low emissions economy inquiry issues paper as the basis for council’s submission:

·    Central government to provide a strong leadership to support New Zealand’s transition to a low emissions future

·    New Zealand’s local government and cities are a key part of the transition to a low emissions future

·    To deliver emissions reduction and build resilience in New Zealand’s economy, we recommend an integrated approach that seeks to deliver multiple outcomes

b)      authorise the Chair and Deputy Chair to review and approve council’s final submission on the Productivity Commission’s low emissions economy inquiry issues paper.

Comments

6.       In April 2017, the government requested that the Productivity Commission undertake an inquiry into how New Zealand can maximise the opportunities and minimise the risks of transitioning to a lower net-emissions economy. The inquiry’s output will be a report identifying a range of options for New Zealand’s transition pathway, which will be tabled to government by 30 June 2018.

7.       The purpose of this inquiry is to identify options for how New Zealand could reduce its domestic greenhouse gas emissions whilst continuing to grow incomes and wellbeing. This builds upon New Zealand’s international commitment to limit the rise in greenhouse gases under the Paris Agreement. New Zealand’s commitment is to reduce emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030.

8.       The Ministers for Climate Change Issues and Minister of Finance identify the following two questions to drive responses to guide the inquiry:

a.   What opportunities exist for the New Zealand economy to maximise the benefits and minimise the cost that a transition to a lower-net economy offers, while continuing to grow incomes and wellbeing?

b.   How could New Zealand’s regulatory, technological, financial and institutional systems processes and practices help to realise the benefits and minimise the costs and risks of a transition to a lower net emissions economy?

9.       At a high level, the scope of the inquiry involves identifying the opportunities and risks across eight different sectors for carbon reduction and technical innovation including: agriculture, forestry, transport, energy for manufacturing, electricity generation, industrial processes and products, buildings and waste. The inquiry also involves assessing the different options for policy and institutional change, alongside how to achieve this transition to a low emissions economy. 

10.     The wider council family is developing a joint submission encompassing three key themes:

a.   Central government to provide strong leadership to support New Zealand’s transition to a low emissions future: 

·    Take stock: There is a need to improve our understanding of the current emissions profile across all sectors to provide a baseline and deliver clarity on key gaps, issues and opportunities.

·    Set policies and legally binding targets:  Set meaningful, ambitious and legally binding domestic emissions reduction targets and associated policies.  This will provide greater certainty across business and local government and demonstrate strong leadership and direction.

·    Provide support:  The transition to a low emissions economy will require substantial action and innovation across sectors.  Central government can support this through a multi-pronged approach incorporating sectoral guidance, partnerships, innovation with business and local government and the establishment of financing mechanisms.

·    Monitor and evaluate: The establishment of robust, independent measurement and monitoring processes to assess progress against commitments and international best practice. 

b.   New Zealand’s local government and cities are a key part of the transition to a low emissions future. To deliver on both national and regional targets, central and local government (cities) need to work in partnership.  Cities occupy only two percent of the world’s landmass, but consume over two-thirds of the world’s energy and account for more than 70 per cent of global CO2 emissions. In 2015, cities like those of the C40 Cities network, played a central role in the delivery of the Paris Agreement, highlighting and defining the role cities play in driving a low emissions future. 

Current and future growth provides both obvious challenges and potential opportunities to deliver substantial emissions reductions while realising economic, social and environmental benefits.  Long term focus and partnership will help ensure that transport, land-use and new investments contribute to the transition to a low carbon economy, help harness and amplify the co-benefits and avoid locking-in carbon intensive infrastructure and associated negative outcomes.

c.   To deliver emissions reduction and build resilience in New Zealand’s economy, we recommend an integrated approach that seeks to deliver multiple outcomes. A low emissions economy is an interconnected system. Delivering a sustainable transition to a low emissions economy requires a coordinated and joined-up approach to climate change and its implications, identifying opportunities to both reduce emissions and embed resilience.  The implications of climate change must be fully integrated into business strategies to ensure that our low emission economy remains competitive into the future and is able to survive climate-related shocks and stresses.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

11.     The scope of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry is specifically focused on the national pathway to reducing New Zealand’s overall emissions.  However, the implications of any transition pathway proposed in the Productivity Commission’s final report will apply across the region to all local boards. Feedback from Local Boards on the council’s draft submission will be sought in the time available.

Māori impact statement

12.     The Chief Sustainability Office is working with Māori colleagues across council in developing the draft, which will then be reviewed through Te Waka Angamua.

13.     Feedback will be sought from mana whenua within the time available.  In addition, mana whenua may also express their views directly to the Commission through their own submissions, including through the Climate Change Iwi Leadership Group referenced in the commission’s Terms of Reference.

Implementation

14.     The final submission will be provided to the Chair and the Deputy Chair for review and approval prior to final submission on 2 October 2017.

15.     Specific actions will be identified from the submission, specifically from the council response to each of the 40 questions posed by the Productivity Commission, and reviewed with the commission’s final report.  Findings from this report will be incorporated into the future review of Low Carbon Auckland and the development of a strategic approach to climate resilience.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

John Mauro - Chief Sustainability Officer

Authorisers

Jacques  Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Jim Quinn - Chief of Strategy

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan

 

File No.: CP2017/18195

 

Purpose

1.       To endorse the Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan.

Executive summary

2.       Auckland’s sport sector has developed a plan to enable a coordinated, integrated and sector-based approach for future sport facility provision in Auckland. Development of this plan was facilitated by Aktive, Sport NZ and Auckland Council.

3.       This project was prompted by the development of the Council’s Sports Facilities Investment Plan. As part of this work, staff and the sport sector identified the need for a mechanism to establish facilities investment priorities across all sports codes for the next 10 years.

4.       The plan responds to the need for a more structured approach to planning and investing in sports facilities due to growing and changing demand.

5.       It focuses on the provision of sports facilities to enable community participation in sport, including social and casual participation. It looks across sport codes and the region as a whole and encourages facility partnerships.

6.       The plan, and supporting processes, will allow the sport sector to clearly communicate to council, investors and potential partners their priorities for investment.

7.       The plan also sets out the evidence required in support of funding proposals.

8.       Aktive is establishing a panel of sector representatives to help prioritise large investment projects. This group will meet in September each year to identify the sector’s high priority projects for investment by applying the agreed regional evaluation and prioritisation criteria.

9.       The Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan was adopted by One Voice on 8 August 2017 (Attachment A). It is recommended that the Committee endorse the plan.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      endorse the Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan.

b)      thank the sport sector, Aktive and Sport NZ for their foresight and work on the development of the plan.

c)      request that staff report back to the committee on the sector’s investment priorities and investigate potential funding options.

 

Comments

Background

Sports Facilities Investment Plan

10.     The Sports Facilities Investment Plan is currently being developed to guide council’s long-term investment in sports facilities. This will enable Auckland Council to take a more coordinated approach to its sports facilities investment.

11.     It will proactively respond to rapid population growth, changing sport preferences and increasing constraints in resource and land supply.

12.     Staff engagement with the sport sector identified four key challenges requiring a collective and integrated response from the sport sector particularly investment priorities, including:

·    a lack of capacity or access to the existing network of facilities (type and/or in a geographic area) which is constraining participation growth for a number of sports codes

·    a growing and changing population and urban intensification which is increasing pressure on existing sports facilities and creating growing and diversified demand for sports facility investment

·    funding and land supply constraints which limit the ability of the sector to respond to demand for investment, which means that priority will need to be given to investments that have the greatest impact on desired outcomes

·    a lack of funding for maintenance and renewals of ageing facilities which means that many sports clubs face challenges to their ongoing financial sustainability.

Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan

13.     Auckland’s sport sector have worked with Aktive, Sport NZ and Auckland Council to enable a coordinated, integrated and sector-based approach for future sport facility provision in Auckland. This includes establishing facilities investment priorities across all sports codes for the next 10 years.

14.     The process involved over 80 organisations, primarily regional and national sport organisations, along with regional sports trusts, major facility providers, local boards and Aktive’s Māori Advisory Group.

15.     The Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan was adopted by One Voice on 8 August 2017 (Attachment A). One Voice is an independent sport and recreation advisory group which consists of representatives from the sport sector.

16.     The focus is provision of sports facilities to enable community participation in sport, including social and casual participation. It looks across codes and the region as a whole and encourages partnerships with others. It considers the challenges, gaps in current provision and future demand for investment in sports facilities in Auckland.

17.     The plan responds to the need for a more structured approach to planning and investing in sports facilities due to growing and changing demand.

18.     Over the last five years, some national and regional sport organisations have developed code facility plans to identify the future needs of their sport. This approach is essential to provide a unified voice and a code-specific view. An Auckland-wide strategic view was also required.

19.     The sector agreed on a set of principles and strategic priorities which are the overarching drivers of the prioritisation process. A set of prioritisation criteria allows the sport sector to undertake a systematic and transparent assessment of potential project priorities.[6] Criteria also help ensure the return on investment in terms of participation and other outcomes are maximised.

Project prioritisation

20.     A panel is being set up by Aktive, consisting of experienced sector representatives, in order to prioritise large investment projects. This panel will come together by September each year, to review projects using the agreed regional evaluation and prioritisation criteria to identify high priority projects for investment.

21.     The agreed priorities can be communicated to investors on an annual basis as an input into their decision-making. Projects ready for assessment will be prioritised across the sector annually using the regional prioritisation criteria.

22.     The plan and supporting processes will allow the sector to clearly communicate to the council, investors and potential partners their priorities for investment. Investors can then make their own decisions based on the guidance from the sport sector.

Strategic alignment

23.     Figure 1 below shows how the Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan fits in the wider strategic context.

24.     The sector plan will inform council’s Sports Facilities Investment Plan, Annual Plan and Long-term Plan processes as well as Local Board Plans. It will help identify the future funding gaps for sports facilities which are currently difficult to estimate due to incomplete information at the sport code level.[7]

Figure 1: Strategic alignment

Risks

25.     There is a risk that the plan could lead to an expectation that all the prioritised projects will receive funding from Council. Staff will work with the sector to manage their expectations. 

Next steps

26.     Staff will report back to the Environment and Community Committee on the sectors investment priorities and investigate potential funding options.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

27.     Three local board cluster workshops were held in the southern, central and northern locations in March 2017. Discussions were informal and didn’t constitute formal positions.


 

28.     The purpose of the engagement was to initially raise awareness and encourage debate to inform the following:

·    key principles to guide identification of sector priorities

·    strategic priorities; both areas of investment focus and type of investment priorities

·    criteria for prioritising larger investment projects

·    critical success factors and approaches for improving use and efficiency of existing facilities

·    tools to assist the sector to plan

·    options for undertaking the assessment of significant projects.

Māori impact statement

29.     Staff engaged with Māori through the Aktive Māori Advisory Group on 2 May 2017. The group provided feedback, including:

·    using culturally appropriate and differentiated pricing strategies that would shift Māori participation and use of facilities within closer proximity of where Māori reside; for example, offering free or lower cost access to facilities in areas with a high proportion of Māori

·    investing in marae which would increase Māori participation, especially where marae are assisted to develop their facility and run activities that are proven to appeal to Māori such as netball, swimming and dancing for girls and touch rugby for boys.

Implementation

30.     Staff are currently drafting the Sports Facilities Investment Plan. The plan will seek to align with the processes and priorities for investment of the Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan. This will help guide council’s future investment decision-making between sports and facility types.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan

53

     

Signatories

Author

Jordan Hamilton - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Senior Policy Manager

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Regional Sport and Recreation Grant Programme

 

File No.: CP2017/13385

 

Purpose

1.       This report provides an update on progress of the past three rounds of the Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme and seeks approval for the 2018/2019 Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme outcomes, assessment matrix and timeframe.

Executive summary

2.       The Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme has been running for three years and allocates an annual budget of $508,000. There has been a strong interest in the Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme with 85 organisations applying for funds and 16 organisations successfully receiving grants. The grants programme has supported a total project cost of over $5M and funded approximately 30% of the total projects costs. This shows that additional funds have been leveraged from other investors.

3.       The Community Grants Policy provides for both one-year and multi-year strategic relationship grants. Multi-year strategic relationship grants encourage long-term relationships enabling recipients to build on outcomes year upon year and assist in leveraging funding from other investors. An example of a possible future multi-year grant recipient is the John Walker Find Your Field of Dreams Foundation. The John Walker Find Your Field of Dreams Foundation’s track record and reports have demonstrated an ability to leverage considerable funding from other investors and provide thousands of participants’ physical activity programmes.

4.       It is proposed the 2018/2019 Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme follow the existing Community Grants Policy outcomes and assessment matrix which will incorporate the pilot outcome measurement tool. The Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme is proposed to open for applications on 30 October 2017 and close on 8 December 2017. After the applications have been assessed it is proposed they will be reported back to the Environment and Community Committee for funding decisions in April 2018. The funds will be available to the successful applicants from July 2018.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve the 2018/2019 Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme to proceed in accordance with the Community Grants Policy suggested outcomes and assessment matrix.

b)      approve the 2018/2019 Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme opens for applications on 30 October 2017, closes on 8 December 2017 and reports back to the Environment and Community Committee for funding decisions to allocate $508,000 from financial year 2018 (FY18).

 

 

 

 

Comments

Discussion

Update on the 2015/2016, 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme (see Attachment C.)

Grant Year

No. of grants

1-year grants

2 Year grants

$ Funded

2015/2016

7

4

3

508,000

2016/2017

(+15/16 2 year grants $333,000)                 

6

3

3

175,000

333,000

2017/2018

7

6

1

508,000

Total

20

13

7

1,524,000

 

5.       From the seven organisations funded in 2015/2016 three organisations received two-year grants of which their second year of funding was allocated from the 2016/2017 pool of funds. This reduced the funds available in 2016/2017 to $175,000.

6.       The three rounds of funding allocated a total of 20 grants to 16 organisations as four organisations received two-year grants. These organisations were John Walker Find Your Field of Dreams Foundation (FYFOD), Bike on NZ Charitable Trust, NZ Hockey and Parafed Auckland. Bike on NZ Charitable Trust and FYFOD have both received three years of funding.

7.       Project reports have been received from all the 2015/2016 grant recipients and the 2016/2017 grant recipients are due to submit reports in August and September 2017. From the six reports received it is evident that the Regional Sport and Recreation Grants Programme (grants programme) has facilitated an increase in the number of young Aucklanders participating in sport and recreation activities. The total participant numbers from the first round are estimated to be in excess of 60,000.

8.       Aucklanders have enjoyed a number of programmes offering informal physical activity in the form of biking, swimming, hockey, athletics and other casual youth activities. Māori participation has increased through the provision of the Tāmaki Tākaro project which has offered Māori youth leadership, weaponry skills and club support. Access has also been improved to youth with disabilities through the ‘hubs of activity’ provided by Parafed Auckland.

Fig. 1

 

 

Fig. 2

 

Figures 1 and 2 shows the grants programme funded approximately 30% of the total project cost of the projects and have therefore leveraged additional funding from other investors.

 

Fig. 3

 

Fig. 4

 

Figures 3 and 4 show that there have continued to be a strong interest in the grants programme. Many unsuccessful applicants did not demonstrate strong alignment to the policy outcomes or failed to provide evidence that the project would significantly increase participation and provide regional rather than local projects.

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 5

 

Figure 5 show that the two groups that have received three years of funding have received the most funds. FYFOD received $646,000 from the total available amount of $1.5M which has enabled them to offer multiple programmes to thousands of participants.

 

Fig. 6

 

All the successful recipients stated in their application that they would target informal physical activity, recreation and sport outcomes. To a lesser degree youth, Māori and disability outcomes were also targeted as shown in figure 6.

2018/2019 Grants Programme

Multi-year funding

9.       The Community Grants Policy (the policy) allows for one-off grants and multi-year grants. Multi-year grants may be entered into with organisations that have an existing relationship with Auckland Council and are able to demonstrate a clear track record of achievements at a regional level. Multi-year grants are entered into for a minimum of three years, and are designed to provide financial certainty and a longer time horizon for the recipient organisation’s planning and programming.

 

 

10.     Prior to the establishment of the grants programme FYFOD received operational funding support from Council and these funds contributed to the establishment of the grants programme. FYFOD’s annual reports and track record indicate an ability to operate at a strategic level and could be considered as a future multi-year grant recipient.

Outcomes  (see Attachment A)

11.     It is proposed the 2018/2019 grants programme follows the policy’s outcomes which are:

Participation

-      There are affordable and accessible options for participation in informal physical activity, recreation and sport

-      Our communities enjoy healthy and active lifestyles

-      Maori participation in sport and recreation activities has increased

Infrastructure

-      Participants in a wide range of physical activities, recreation activities and sports are equally able to access suitable facilities and outdoor environments.

Assessment (see Attachment B)

12.     The policy assessment matrix has informed the assessment process in the previous three rounds of funding. Applicants must show that their project primarily addresses regionally determined priorities and is regional in terms of scale, significance, impact and reach. Eligible applications are assessed and ranked by a cross Council team.

13.     On 4 April 2017, the Environment and Community committee resolved to develop an outcome measurements tool modelled on the Treasury’s CBAx and to pilot this with the 2018/2019 grants programme (Resolution ENV/2017/50). This tool will provide a clear line-of-sight between council investment and the desired outcomes and use robust methodology and tested assumptions. It will also be easy to understand and be able to be applied across different forms of investment. The policy assessment matrix will be fine-tuned to include the outcome measurement tool which will improve the monitoring and evaluation of the 2018/2019 grant programme.

Timeframe

14.     It is proposed that grants programme opens for applications on 30 October 2017 and closes on 8 December 2017.  After an initial eligibility, assessment staff will work with eligible applicants and request more information where required during December 2017 and January 2018.  Applications will then be assessed and ranked by a cross Council team in February 2018.  After the applications have been assessed, reports will be presented to the Environment and Community Committee workshop and business meetings in March and April 2018.  The successful recipients will then be informed and funding agreements and key performance indicators prepared before July 2018.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15.     Local boards were consulted through the development of the policy. Local boards have noted that there are organisations and projects that do not qualify for local board funding and are therefore in need of a regional funding option.


 

 

Māori impact statement

16.     The grants programme has offered and will continue to offer opportunities to deliver on Te Whai Oranga, the Māori Sport and Recreation Plan for Auckland. Examples are:

·    the provision of  administration support to Māori sports clubs, increasing their capability and capacity

·    teaching traditional Māori sports and games

·    promoting and enabling rangatahi leadership

·    providing increased opportunities for Māori to participate in recreation in supportive settings

Implementation

17.     The grants programme is opened for applications on 30 October 2017 and closes on 8 December 2017. Eligible applications will be assessed and ranked against the policy assessment matrix.

18.     Application assessments will be presented to the Environment and Community Committee in April 2018 for funding decisions.

19.     Following the funding decisions by the Environment and Community Committee, all successfully applicants will be notified of the outcome. 

20.     Funding agreements and key performance indicators will be prepared before July 2018.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Regional Sports and Recreation Grants Programme Guidelines

83

b

Assessment Matrix

85

c

Grants Programme Summary

87

d

Investment Diagram

91

     

Signatories

Author

Geraldine Wilson - Activation Advisor - Outdoors

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Te Whau Pathway Scheme Assessment Report

 

File No.: CP2017/17713

 

Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to provide an update on Te Whau Pathway Scheme Assessment Report and seek endorsement to move to detailed design and resource consent.

Executive summary

2.       Te Whau Pathway is a project of regional significance that will link the Waitemata and Manukau Harbours via a shared path designed to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists.  Modelling predicts around 340,000 pedestrians and cyclists will use the busiest section of the path each year.

3.       Te Whau Pathway is a collaborative project and work to date has been funded by these project partners: the Whau Coastal Walkway Environment Trust, the Whau and Henderson-Massey Local Boards, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council.

4.       There is a significant opportunity to secure 53% of the project costs from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) if the project is locally funded in the first instance and demonstrates a net benefit. 

5.       Project partners have raised $1.5 million for the 3km of paths built to date, paid for the Project Feasibility Report and the Scheme Assessment Report (approx. $1.1 million) and will fund detailed design ($1.4 million). 

6.       The Trust plans to raise another $5 million over the next five years.  The Whau Local Board resolved on 23 August to provide $300,000 this financial year towards the pathway.  The Henderson-Massey Local Board will consider a resolution to provide $900,000 over three years towards the project on 19 September 2017. 

7.       Funding from Auckland Council is required to supplement the funding from the project partners.  Te Whau Pathway will be included in the Parks Strategic Asset Management Plan. 

8.       The Scheme Assessment Report for Te Whau Pathway has been completed and includes a Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) calculated in accordance with the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) Economic Evaluation Manual.  The BCR is 2.2 and the strategic fit and link to SH16 are identified as strong benefits.

9.       It is proposed that Te Whau Pathway proceed to the detailed design and consent stage because the pathway is required to provide a safe and efficient off road environment for hundreds of people each day, including many of the 6,000 students who live near the path.

 

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      note the completion of Te Whau Pathway Scheme Assessment Report dated 30 June 2017.

b)      endorse the progression to detailed design and resource consent for Te Whau Pathway.

 

 

 

 

Comments

Scheme Assessment Report

10.     Te Whau Pathway will be 12km long and connect the Waitemata and Manukau Harbours following the ancient Maori portage route between the harbours (figure 1).

Te Whau Pathway AT Consultation mapFigure 1: Te Whau Pathway route between Te Atatu and Green Bay in West Auckland

 

11.     The pathway is part of the Auckland Cycle Network and will be both an express metro route and a local connector.  It will link currently unconnected communities along the river and improve the environmental and recreational value of 30 parks along its route.

12.     The Scheme Assessment Report for Te Whau Pathway has been completed (30 June 2017) for Auckland Council and Auckland Transport.  It is over 1,000 pages and includes a preliminary design, economic evaluation, geotechnical investigation, archaeological report, ecological reports, regulatory analysis, a reviewed project cost, proposed materials, contamination assessment, arborist report, visual assessment, staging options, public art framework and an urban and landscape design framework. 

13.     The report, funded by Auckland Transport, outlines the preferred route and material options for the pathway and completes the last stage in the project investigation phase.  It provides a solid foundation for investment in the project going forward. 

 

Risks and Issues

14.     Risks and issues identified in the Scheme Assessment Report include:

·    Objections from a small number of adjacent residents because of impacts on visual amenity, uninterrupted views and loss of privacy.  To address this it is proposed to provide mitigation measures such as fencing, screen planting and tinted windows for severely impacted properties.  The resource consent application will be publically notified to ensure the full range of public opinion is heard on the proposal.

·    Areas of the pathway feeling unsafe because they are isolated.  Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles have been used to minimise this issue where ever possible, to create well used open public spaces with good visibility and passive surveillance.

·    A risk that costs increase during project development, for example if unforeseen geological conditions exist.  The current project budget includes 30% contingency to provide a buffer for such scenarios. 

Benefits of Te Whau Pathway

15.     Te Whau Pathway strongly supports many Auckland Plan, Long Term Plan and Local Board Plans such as:

·    a well-connected and accessible Auckland

·    improved performance of the transport network by providing infrastructure to make walking and cycling real options for more Aucklanders

·    providing quality public open space which is a critical component for healthy lifestyles in an urban environment

·    a green Auckland, creating ecological connections through seven suburbs

·    Whau Local Board outcomes: “A healthy Whau River and valued environment” and “In the Whau, it’s 20 minutes to everything we need”

·    Henderson-Massey Local Board outcomes: “Real choices between walking, cycling, public transport and cars”

16.     Te Whau Pathway will provide a safe and efficient environment for pedestrians and cyclists in communities along the Whau River and Portage Road.  The pathway is an important link in the Auckland Cycle Network.  Te Whau Pathway has a dual purpose: it is both an express metro route and a local connector.  It will improve access to the city via the State Highway 16 cycle path and the proposed New Lynn to Avondale shared path.  This will maximise the benefits of all of these pathways and provide links to the New Lynn and Avondale rail stations, enabling multi-modal travel. 

17.     The pathway is in the catchment of 23 schools with 6,000 students and will provide a new safer off road path that connects schools with the community.  Modelling predicts 620 pedestrians and 310 cyclists a day will use the busiest section of the pathway when it is complete.

Consultation and Support

18.     Three hundred and eighty three submissions were received during public consultation on the draft Scheme Plan. Overall, most submitters indicated great support for the project, and are excited about the new recreational, educational and commuting opportunities that the pathway will provide.  They liked that the pathway design is simple and fits with the environment and the path is scenic and away from traffic.

19.     Twenty five submitters did not support the project with the main reasons being safety and security, particularly at night.  Other issues raised included the pathway being an eyesore and unsympathetic with the Whau River environment.  Some said the pathway will destroy outlooks and privacy and devalue property.  The pathway will be lit at night and has been designed to achieve Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles. 

Project Partners

20.     Te Whau Pathway is a partnership between the Whau Coastal Walkway Environment Trust, mana whenua (Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei), Auckland Transport, the Whau and Henderson-Massey Local Boards and Auckland Council. 

Project Funding To Date

21.     The Whau Coastal Walkway Environment Trust has raised $1.5 million for the 3km of paths built in parks so far.  The Trust plans to raise another $5 million over the next five years for the pathway.  Auckland Council funded the detailed design and consenting of the paths built to date.

22.     The Whau and Henderson-Massey Local Boards have provided funds for the project.  The Whau Local Board resolved on 23 August to provide $300,000 this financial year towards the pathway and has indicated they will continue to support and fund the project going forward.  The Henderson-Massey Local Board will consider a resolution to provide $900,000 over three years towards the project on 19 September 2017. 

23.     Auckland Transport funded the Project Feasibility Report and the Scheme Assessment Report (approx. $1.1 million).  Auckland Transport budget has been secured to enable detailed design to continue in 2017/18 ($1.4 million). 

24.     There is a significant opportunity to secure a portion of the project costs from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) if the project demonstrates a net benefit and if the project is locally funded in the first instance.  Once local funding is secured an application will be made to NZTA.  If NZTA agree the project fits their criteria they can subsidize the project, up to 53% of the project cost. 

25.     Funding from Auckland Council is required to supplement the funding from the Whau Coastal Walkway Environment Trust and the Local Boards.  Not funding the pathway would be a lost opportunity to acquire external funding for public assets from project partners.  Failure to complete the pathway will be a lost opportunity to meet the needs of pedestrian and cyclists in communities along the 12km pathway route and wider urban area. 

Consideration

Local board views and implications

26.     The Whau Local Board initiated this project by supplying $240,000 for planning of stage 1 in 2014/15.  Te Whau Pathway is listed in the Whau Local Board Plan and the Whau Greenway Plan.  It is identified in the Whau Local Board Open Space Network Plan and is described as a destination corridor.

27.     Te Whau Pathway is mentioned in the Henderson-Massey Local Board Plan and is a high priority action for trails in the Henderson-Massey Open Space Network Plan.  The Henderson-Massey Local Board provided $50,000 towards Te Whau Pathway last financial year. 

Māori impact statement

28.     Representatives from mana whenua iwi (Te Kawerau a Maki and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei) sit on the project steering group and are involved in project decision making at this governance level.  Cultural Impact Assessments have been provided by these two iwi as well as Ngati Te Ata Waiohua. 

29.     The Landscape and Urban Design Framework of the Scheme Assessment Report defines the design principles and concepts of Te Whau Pathway.  It includes the Te Aranga Design Principles and lists mana whenua aspirations for the pathway, including for example, mana whenua-led creative expression of aspirations and traditions and appropriate inclusion of Te Reo Māori throughout the project. 

Implementation

30.     Funding for the remaining 9km of the pathway is not yet secured.  The cost estimate for the rest of the pathway is $64-69 million, depending on the type of handrails used on the boardwalk in the final design.  This estimate includes 30% contingency. 

31.     The preferred approach to building the pathway is to build it in one phase, from stage five to stage one.  This would provide savings due to economies of scale and reduced set up costs.  However, this requires the budget for the full project cost to be available.  A staged approach is the next preferred option. 

32.     The route is broken into five stages and can be built in phases as funding becomes available.  Stage two (between Ken Maunder Park and Olympic Park) and stage five (between Laurieston Park and State Highway 16) are the highest priorities for completion.  The cost for stage two is $15 million and stage five is $22 million. 

33.     Funding is available in 2018/19 from the Whau and Henderson-Massey Local Boards and the Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust.  The project will be included in the Parks Strategic Asset Management Plan. 

34.     An application to the NZTA can be made to part fund the project.  If NZTA agree the project fits their criteria they can reimburse a portion of the project costs, up to 53%.  However, NZTA require evidence of the local share of funding.  Therefore, Council must agree to fund all or some of the project before NZTA funding can be applied for. 

Detailed Design and Resource Consent

35.     The Scheme Assessment Report provides a solid foundation for the pathway and is the final step in the project investigation phase.  The project will now move to the design stage, which includes detailed design of priority sections and publically notified resource consent for the entire pathway route.  Detailed design will provide more accurate costings for the works. 

36.     Once funding is secured and resource consent is granted, physical works on the boardwalk sections of Te Whau Pathway can begin.  It is hoped to complete Te Whau Pathway by 2022.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Signatories

Author

Jacki Byrd - Te Whau Pathway Project Lead

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Classification of a parcel of land at Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park, Puhoi

 

File No.: CP2017/17850

 

Purpose

1.       To classify Lot 3 DP 199344 comprising part of Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park as a recreation reserve.

Executive summary

2.       In 2000, the former Rodney District Council acquired Lot 3 DP 199344 as recreation reserve. Lot 3 DP 199344 is one of 10 land parcels comprising the Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park.

3.       In 2004, the former Rodney District Council granted a licence to occupy to The Puhoi Community Forum Incorporated which included a provision for a sub-licence to occupy to a grazier for Lot 1 DP 199344 and Pt MBlk Okahu ML 86. 

4.       The licence to occupy has expired and the community forum has formally applied to council for a new licence to occupy with the provision for a sub-licence to a grazier for Lot 3 DP199344 in addition to Lot 1 DP 199344 and Pt MBlk Okahu ML 86 on Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park.

5.       Lot 3 DP 199344 is currently an unclassified recreation reserve and subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. Under the Act, Auckland Council must formally resolve to classify land for the purpose for which it was acquired. Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee holds the delegated authority to formally classify land by resolution.

6.       Auckland Council staff has satisfied the statutory public notification and iwi engagement processes required for the classification. Subject to the resolution by the Environment and Community Committee to classify Lot 3 DP 199344, these actions would enable the Rodney Local Board to consider the grant of a new licence to the community forum.

7.       This report recommends that the Environment and Community Committee approve the classification of Lot 3 DP 199344 as recreation reserve under the provisions of the Reserves Act.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve, pursuant to Section 16(2A)(g) of the Reserves Act 1977, to classify Lot 3 DP 199344 comprising 1362 m² more or less (Attachment A) as recreation reserve.

Comments

History of land title and legal mechanism for classifying Lot 3 DP 199344

8.       The history of land title and legal mechanism for classifying Lot 3 DP 199344 is detailed in the table below:

The parcel of land described as Lot 3 DP 199344 comprising 1362m² (more or less) is held in fee simple by Auckland Council and under the Land Transfer Act 1952 is contained in Computer Freehold Register as NA128A/154.

In 2000, Lot 3 DP 199344 was vested in the former Rodney District Council (now Auckland Council) as a recreation reserve pursuant to Part 10, section 239(1)(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Section 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 empowers local councils to declare by resolution reserve lands held in fee simple to be classified for particular purposes as described under that Act.

Section 16(2A)(g) of the Reserves Act provides for the classification of Lot 3 DP 199344 as recreation reserve “as the reserve was created under Part 10 of the Resource Management Act 1991 and is or remains vested in a local authority, that local authority shall, by resolution, classify the reserve according to its principal or primary purpose as defined in sections 17 to 23 of the Act”.

Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 is the driver for iwi engagement with reserve lands and reads; “This Act shall so be interpreted and administered as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi”. Auckland Council is expected (and as good practice) to fulfil the obligations of Section 4 on behalf of the Crown as treaty partner when dealing with either council owned or council managed reserves. As such, mana whenua identified as having an interest in land in the Rodney Local Board area are being engaged on the proposal.

At its business meeting of 20 July 2017, the Rodney Local Board Transport Infrastructure and Environment Committee resolved to endorse the classification of Lot 3 DP 199344 as a recreation reserve.

 

Land, occupation and activities undertaken by the community forum

9.       The Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park is located adjacent to the Puhoi Village (Attachment B). Access to the main part of the park (including the licence to occupy area) is via Domain Road and across a small one-way bridge over the Puhoi River.

10.     In 2004, the former Rodney District Council granted a licence to occupy to the community forum. The permitted use of the licence is to carry out improvements to the park for the benefit of users of the park and for grazing purposes. The licence contained a provision for a sub-licence to a grazier, commenced 1 September 2004 for one term of three years and expired on 31 August 2007.

11.     In 2008, the Rodney District Council varied the licence to extend the term by two additional years and expired on 31 August 2009. The licence is currently rolling over on a month-to-month basis on the original terms and conditions. A grazier is currently occupying the bulk of the community forum’s licence area under the sub-licence.’

12.     On 8 June 2017, a key representative for the community forum and Auckland Council staff undertook a site visit for the purpose of viewing the extensive area, the improvements to the park undertaken by both the community forum and the incumbent grazier and to discuss planned works at the park. It was apparent from the visit that the community forum and the grazier are committed to managing and improving their respective licence areas and are equally aware of the consequential environmental factors relating to the adjacent Puhoi River.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13.     On 14 June 2017, the Rodney Local Board was presented with a memorandum on the proposal by way of email. No concerns were raised in the feedback received.

14.     At its business meeting of 20 July 2017, the Rodney Local Board Transport Infrastructure and Environment Committee resolved to endorse the classification of Lot 3 DP 199344 as a recreation reserve, Resolution number RODTP/2017/23 (Attachment C).

Māori impact statement

15.     During July and August 2017, engagement was undertaken with the 14 mana whenua identified as having an interest in land in the Rodney Local Board area about the proposal to classify Lot 3 DP 199344.

 

 

16.     Engagement involved:

·    email contact containing detailed information and inviting iwi representatives to hui and/or for a Kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impact with respect to the proposal

·    a site meeting was held on 20 July 2017 with the Pou Kaitiaki for Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust from which a Kaitiaki report was submitted, stating no objection to the classification (Attachment D)

·    resulting from the email contact, the other 13 iwi either deferred their interests to Hokai Nuku (comprising Ngati Manuhiri, Ngati Rango o Kaipara, NgatiMauku/Ngati Kauae of Te Uri o Hau and Ngati Whatua) or advised that the reserve lay outside their area of interest, or did not respond

·    Auckland Council staff attended the Northern Mana Whenua Forum held at Orewa on 2 August 2017 at which time the proposal was briefly presented to iwi representatives in attendance. Iwi representatives present did not raise any concerns with respect to the proposal to classify Lot 3 DP 199344.

Implementation

17.     The cost implications associated with the classification process was approximately $230.00. This cost was borne by the Community Facilities Department.

18.     The classification of Lot 3 DP 199344 as recreation reserve will enable the Rodney Local Board to grant a licence to occupy to The Puhoi Community Forum Incorporated under the Reserves Act 1977.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

GIS aerial view of part of Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park showing Lot 3 DP 199344 outlined in red

103

b

Location plan for Puhoi Pioneers Memorial Park

105

c

Resolution number RODTP/2017/23

107

d

Kaitiaki report

109

     

Signatories

Author

Karen Walby - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Classification of Putiki Reserve, Shelly Beach Road,Surfdale, Waiheke Island

 

File No.: CP2017/16724

 

Purpose

1.       To seek approval from the Environment and Community Committee to classify Putiki Reserve located at Shelly Beach Road, Surfdale on Waiheke Island as a recreation reserve.

Executive summary

2.       The Waiheke Sea Scouts occupy a small portion of the Putiki Reserve.   In 2010 a lease was granted to the Scouts by the Auckland City Council which did not comply with the Reserves Act 1977.

3.       Due to the current status of the reserve, the only suitable option is to classify the reserve as a recreation reserve. This will allow the Auckland Council to grant a lease to the Scouts correctly in accordance with the Reserves Act.

4.       This recommendation supports the Auckland Plan strategic directives to ‘integrate arts and culture into our everyday lives’ and ‘plan, deliver and maintain quality infrastructure to make Auckland liveable and resilient.’  It also supports the council to meet its statutory obligations under the Reserves Act 1977 to classify all reserves held under that Act.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve to classify the following parcel of land as a recreation reserve pursuant to Section 16 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977:

Lot 1 DP 29734 comprising 9611 square metres and contained in Part NA492/111 (Cancelled).

 

Comments

5.       In May 2010 a lease was granted to the Waiheke Sea Scouts under the Reserves Act for an initial term of five years from 19 July 2007 with two rights of renewal with final expiry on 18 July 2022.   When the lease was renewed in 2012, it was found that the lease had been issued contrary to the provisions of the Reserves Act.  Due to this issue, renewal of the lease has not progressed since that time, and in accordance with the Property Law Act 2007, the expired lease has been allowed to roll over on a monthly basis to enable the Scout’s occupancy to remain secured. This practice is not appropriate and a permanent solution is required for the long term.

6.       Putiki Reserve was originally acquired by the Crown as a recreation reserve in 1941 and later declared by the Crown to be a domain.  Later still the domain was declared by the Crown to form part of the Waiheke Domain and came under the control and management of the Waiheke Domain Board.   The responsibilities of the Domain Board were assumed by the Waiheke Road Board and later by the Waiheke County Council.

7.       When the Reserves Act came into force in 1978, Putiki Reserve, along with the balance of the Waiheke Domain, became an unclassified recreation reserve, pending classification, and remained under the control and management of the Waiheke County Council.   In 1989 the Auckland City Council inherited control and management of Putiki Reserve until 2010 when the Auckland Council assumed management.  

8.       While changes have occurred over the years with the management of Putiki Reserve, the underlying ownership of the land has remained with the Crown through the Department of Conservation as an unclassified recreation reserve under the Reserves Act.

9.       Section 59A (1) of the Reserves Act requires any permit, easement, licence or lease to be granted by the council over any land that holds similar status to Putiki Reserve in the form of a concession and in terms of Part IIIB of the Conservation Act 1987. 

10.     The lease granted to the Scouts in 2010 under the Reserves Act is therefore invalid and ‘ultra vires’ in terms of that Act.   Staff investigated options for providing an agreement to the Scouts to regularise their occupation of the reserve which included the following;

·    doing nothing

·    providing an agreement outside the parameters of both the Reserves and Conservation Acts

·    granting a concession under Part IIIB of the Conservation Act

·    classifying under the Reserves Act as a recreation reserve.

11.     Doing nothing is not acceptable as it does not resolve the impasse.

12.     The option of classification of the reserve was preferred to the option of granting a concession under the Conservation Act because the classification option has an additional benefit. Upon classification the reserve, while remaining held in Crown ownership, will vest in the council, in trust, for recreation purposes.  Once Putiki Reserve had vested in the council in trust, the council would be empowered to grant a lease to the Scouts under the Reserves Act in the normal way. The Reserves Act requires all reserves to be classified for their principle or primary purpose.   In classifying Putiki Reserve, the council is completing its main obligation as the reserve administering body for Putiki Reserve and complying with the general requirements of the Reserves Act.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13.     On 27 July 2017 the Waiheke Local Board passed resolution WHK/2017/114 supporting the Environment and Community Committee to classify the reserve for recreation purposes.

14.     Classifying Putiki Reserve supports the Waiheke Local Board Plan criteria of ‘thriving, strong and engaged communities’ and ‘vibrant places for people that reflect the character of the island.’

15.     There are no associated costs to the Waiheke Local Board as prior public advertising of the proposed classification is not required under the Reserves Act. 

Māori impact statement

16.     As required under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, all iwi contacts related to the Waiheke Local Board were formally advised in writing of the proposed classification.  No responses were received.

Implementation

17.     Provided the committee resolves to classify Putiki Reserve as a recreation reserve, the council’s Minister of Conservation delegate will sign a gazette notice declaring pursuant to Section 16 (1) of the Reserves Act that Putiki Reserve is classified as a recreation reserve.

18.     Once the gazette notice has been published by the council in the New Zealand Gazette, Putiki Reserve will by virtue of Section 26A (1) and (2) of the Reserves Act vest in the Auckland Council, in trust, for recreation purposes.

19.     With the completion of these two steps, the Putiki Reserve will have met the reserve classification requirements of the Reserves Act and enable the council to grant a lease to the Waiheke Sea Scouts under the Reserves Act in the normal way.    

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Maps of Putiki reserve

115

     

Signatories

Author

Dave Bayley - Specialist Technical Statutory Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


 


 


 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Reserve classification of three parcels of land at 33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick

 

File No.: CP2017/16702

 

Purpose

1.       To seek approval from the Environment and Community Committee to classify three parcels of land located at 33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve. 

Executive summary

2.       33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick, comprises three parcels of land which are owned by Auckland Council and held under the Reserves Act 1977 as unclassified local purpose reserve.

3.       The land is occupied by the Uxbridge Creative Centre, a council owned arts and culture facility that has been run by Uxbridge Community Projects Incorporated since 1981. The group was granted a new lease in June 2016 for a term of one year, with a further term of five years to commence from the date of classification of the land.

4.       To permit the activities of the group taking place within the portions of the centre occupying the three parcels of land, staff recommended that the three parcels be classified as local purpose (community buildings) reserve under Section 16 (2A) (a) of the Reserves Act.

5.       This recommendation supports the Auckland Plan strategic directives to “integrate arts and culture into our everyday lives” and “plan, deliver and maintain quality infrastructure to make Auckland liveable and resilient.” It also supports the council to meet its statutory obligations under the Reserves Act 1977 to classify all reserves held under that Act.  

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve to classify the following three parcels of land occupied by Uxbridge Community Projects Incorporated as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve pursuant to Section 16 (2A) (a) of the Reserves Act 1977:

i)        Part Lot 3 DP 47633 comprising 703 square metres and contained in NA7A/65

ii)       Part Lot 4 DP 47633 comprising 172 square metres and contained in NA1946/76

iii)      Part Lot 1 DP 8807 comprising 2474 square metres and contained in NA1678/48.

Comments

6.       The classification of all reserves held under the Reserves Act is a statutory requirement under that Act and, in its capacity as the reserves administering body, the Auckland Council is required to eventually classify its entire reserves network. Reserves are classified according to their principal or primary purpose, as defined in sections 17 to 23 of the Reserves Act, in order to ensure the control, management, development, use, maintenance and preservation of reserves for their appropriate purpose.

7.       33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick, is made up of three parcels of land comprising 3,349 square metres. All of the parcels of land are owned by Auckland Council in fee simple and are held under the Reserves Act 1977 as unclassified local purpose reserve:

a)      Part Lot 3 DP 47633 comprising 703 square metres and contained in NA7A/65

b)      Part Lot 4 DP 47633 comprising 172 square metres and contained in NA1946/76

c)      Part Lot 1 DP 8807 comprising 2474 square metres and contained in NA1678/48.

8.       The three unclassified parcels of land are occupied by the Uxbridge Creative Centre, a council owned complex encompassing a purpose built art gallery, storeroom, practical arts studios, meeting rooms, administration area and café space. The complex was reopened in June and October 2016 after a year-long redevelopment to realise the community’s vision for a fit for purpose arts and culture facility.

9.       The centre has been run by the independent non-for-profit entity Uxbridge Community Projects Incorporated since 1981. On 13 June 2016, the Howick Local Board granted the group a lease for a term of one year from the date of practical completion of the complex, which was 9 September 2016, and a lease for a term of five years commencing from the date of classification of the land (HW/2016/252).

10.     The centre accommodates a programme of 250 classes and workshops, 52 performances, eight gallery exhibitions and 12 public programmes a year to the local community. The centre is a key piece of arts and culture infrastructure for east Auckland.

11.     To permit the activities of the group taking place within the portions of the centre occupying the three unclassified parcels of land, staff recommended that the three parcels be classified as local purpose (community buildings) reserve under Section 16 (2A) (a) of the Reserves Act.

12.     This recommendation supports the Auckland Plan strategic directives to “integrate arts and culture into our everyday lives” and “plan, deliver and maintain quality infrastructure to make Auckland liveable and resilient.” It also supports the council to meet its statutory obligations under the Reserves Act 1977 to classify all reserves held under that Act.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

13.     Staff discussed the proposal with the Howick Local Board at workshops on 2 March, 31 March and 24 May 2016. At the business meeting on 13 June 2016, Howick Local Board passed resolution HW/2016/252 supporting the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee to classify the land. The relevant committee for reserve classification is now the Environment and Community Committee.

14.     The classification supports the Howick Local Board Plan 2014 outcomes “Howick’s future is managed effectively” and “an involved and connected community” by enabling facilities and open spaces to better used to meet existing and future growth needs in the arts and culture space.

15.     There are no associated costs to the Howick Local Board as prior public advertising is not required. There is no statutory requirement under Section 16 (2A) of the Reserves Act for council to publicly advertise its intention to classify any reserve made by resolution under Section 16 (2A).

Māori impact statement

16.     As required under Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987, iwi were initially consulted on the proposal to classify the three parcels of land at a mana whenua meeting on 26 April 2017. Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki enquired regarding the difference, if any, between the three parcels being classified or unclassified which the council answered. In June 2017, all iwi contacts related to the Howick Local Board were formally advised of the proposal in writing. One response was received from Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki who advised that they had no further interest in this proposal.

Implementation

17.     If the committee resolves to classify the three land parcels as local purpose (community buildings) reserve under Section 16 (2A) (a) of the Reserves Act, then the reserve is deemed classified in terms of the Reserves Act.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Maps of 33-35 Uxbridge Road, Howick

123

b

Howick Local Board resolution HW/2016/252

127

     

Signatories

Author

Dave Bayley - Specialist Technical Statutory Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


 


 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Approval of the Disability and Seniors Advisory Panels' 2017/2018 work programmes

 

File No.: CP2017/18037

 

Purpose

1.       To approve the work programmes of the Disability Advisory Panel and Seniors Advisory Panel for the 2017/2018 financial year.

Executive Summary

2.       The Disability Advisory Panel and Seniors Advisory Panel have developed their 2017/2018 work programmes for the approval of the Environment and Community Committee. The work programmes are in Attachments A and B.

3.       The priorities of the Disability Advisory Panel are:

·    implementation of the council’s Disability Operational Action Plan

·    council’s Inclusive Auckland (Diversity and Inclusion) Framework

·    Investing in Aucklanders - a council project to identify barriers to participation.

4.       The Seniors Advisory Panel’s work programme will focus on the following areas:

·    better public transport services and accessible options for senior citizens

·    quality mixed housing options and urban design

·    more culturally diverse programmes

·    more engaging recreational and community spaces and activities

·    protecting our environment for the next generations.

5.       All demographic advisory panels will advise on the following items:

·    The Long-term Plan 2018-2028

·    Auckland Plan Refresh.

6.       Philip Patston and Janet Clews, Disability and Seniors Advisory Panel Chairs will present their work programmes and priorities to the committee. 

7.       The remaining demographic advisory panels will present their work programmes to the committee in October and November 2017.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      approve the work programmes of the Disability and Seniors Advisory Panels for the 2017/2018 financial year.

b)      note that the lead officers of the Disability and Seniors Advisory Panels will update the panels’ work programmes to track progress.

Comments

8.       On 10 November 2016 the mayor established six demographic advisory panels for the 2016-2019 term of the council. The role of the panels is to advise on the council’s regional agendas and effective engagement with diverse communities of Auckland. These panels are the:

·    Disability Advisory Panel

·    Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

·    Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel

·    Seniors Advisory Panel

·    Rainbow Communities Advisory Panel

·    Youth Advisory Panel.

9.       Since their establishment in April 2017, the advisory panels have advised on council’s policy development and engagement practices on the following plans:

·    Auckland Plan Refresh

·    Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw Review

·    Tākaro – Investing in Play.

10.     The terms of reference for demographic panels require each panel to develop a work programme to highlight in which priorities areas they will focus their advice. The work programmes define the panels’ focus areas for the 2017/2018 financial year.

11.     The panels’ work programmes should align with the Auckland Plan and the forward work programme of the Environment and Community Committee.

12.     The panels have received information on the council’s focus areas relevant to their communities over the past three months, which has informed the development of their work programmes. These include the priorities of the council’s community services, community policies, council’s engagement practices and research projects.

Disability Advisory Panel priorities

13.     Every Aucklander should access council services and public information without barriers. The Disability Advisory Panel’s work programme supports council initiatives for better access for people with disabilities.

14.     On 8 August 2017, the Disability Advisory Panel discussed their priorities for the 2017/2018 financial year and decided on the following areas:

·    implementation of the council’s Disability Operational Action Plan

·    council’s Inclusive Auckland (Diversity and Inclusion) Framework

·    Investing in Aucklanders – a council project to identify barriers to participation.

a)        

15.     The Auckland Council Disability Operational Action Plan aims to improve outcomes for people with disabilities and their families in Auckland. Many departments across the council family have committed to developing and implementing more accessible services. The Disability Advisory Panel will advise those departments on how to develop better services for people with disabilities.   

16.     The council has developed a diversity and inclusion framework to guide council staff in working more inclusively and effectively with Auckland’s diverse populations. The framework includes actions to improve diversity and inclusion outcomes for council staff and for all Aucklanders. The Disability Advisory Panel will advise on the implementation of the framework.

17.     Investing in Aucklanders is a council initiative to better understand existing barriers to participation of particularly diverse communities. The findings will be used for the council initiatives and potentially policies to mitigate such barriers. The panel will offer their lived experiences to ensure that the council organisation understands the challenges the disability community faces in Auckland. 

18.     Through the work programme, the panel will help the council develop more accessible plans in the housing, transport and social infrastructure areas.

Seniors Advisory Panel priorities

19.     On 21 August 2017, the Seniors Advisory Panel discussed its priorities and is proposing the following:

·    better public transport services and accessible options for senior citizens

·    quality mixed housing options and urban design

·    more culturally diverse programmes

·    more engaging recreational and community spaces and activities

·    protecting our environment for the next generations.

20.     Affordable and accessible transport systems are important in senior citizens’ lives. The Seniors Advisory Panel is committed to advising the council family on the interests and concerns of the elderly regarding improved public transport and other transport options, including cycle ways and walkways.

21.     The council needs to understand how senior citizens’ lifestyles are changing and reflect this in relevant development plans and design guidelines. The Seniors Advisory Panel is interested in how mixed-housing models and effective place-making including public open space can help achieve good quality neighbourhoods. The Panel will also advise on implementation of council policies on affordable housing and universal design.

22.     It is important that senior citizens feel valued and are encouraged to participate in recreational and community activities for healthy lifestyle. The panel will advise on council’s recreational activities and activation of open spaces for senior citizens to ensure changing future needs can be met.

23.     The population of Māori, ethnic and Pacific senior citizens is increasing. The council must consider culturally diverse programmes for the elderly of many ethnic origins to achieve better participation and an increased sense of belonging. The panel will advise the council to consider more cultural and diversity initiatives which encourage greater participation by senior citizens.   

24.     Clean air, healthy forests and fresh water are the assets of the current generation, and it is seen as their responsibility to protect and pass on a better environment to the next generations. The Seniors Advisory Panel is dedicated to sharing their views on environmental and open space protection initiatives such as reduction of plastic waste and addressing kauri dieback with urgency, applying Māori values and heritage considerations.    

25.     The panel will help the council enhance community interactions and strengthen social cohesion through their strategic advice based on the work programme.

Shared priorities across all the panels

26.     All demographic panels will contribute to the Auckland Plan Refresh and the Long-term Plan 2018-2028.

27.     The panels had an integrated panel session on the Auckland Plan Refresh in April 2017. They also advised staff on how to effectively engage with diverse communities. The panels will continue to provide feedback throughout the refresh process.

28.     The panels will offer their input into the council’s long-term plan and help the council to engage with relevant communities for submissions and input. 

Panels’ advice and priorities through panel meetings

29.     The panels will provide strategic and engagement advice to the council through their monthly meetings with staff. The panels will engage with the governing body through the chief liaison councillor and liaison councillors. The panel chairs will present to relevant council committees on specific issues at the request of committee chairs.

30.     The work programmes will help the panels track the progress of their advice and the panels’ lead officers will update the work programmes. The panels will revisit their priority areas at the end of this financial year to plan for the next financial year. 

Local Board views and implications

31.     The role of the demographic advisory panels is to advise the governing body and staff on regional issues. Local boards did not provide input into this process.

Māori impact statement

32.     The Disability and Seniors Advisory Panels have at least one Māori member each, who offered the perspectives of Te Ao Māori during the development of the work programmes.

33.     Inclusive engagement approaches are key to shaping successful council plans. The advisory panels advise the council on effective engagement with Māori iwi and hapū, particularly on council initiatives that involve land use and are directly relevant to environmental issues.

Implementation

34.     The work programmes are living documents which will be updated at each meeting to reflect progress. The panels will review their work programmes at the end of each financial year and update their priorities where necessary.

35.     The remaining demographic panels’ work programmes will be available for the approval of the committee in October and November 2017.

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Disability Advisory Panel work programme 2017/2018

133

b

Seniors Advisory Panel Work Programme 2017-2018

135

     

Signatories

Author

Austin Kim - Principal Advisor Panels

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - General Manager Democracy Services

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 



Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Summary of Environment and Community Committee information memos and briefings - 12 September 2017

 

File No.: CP2017/17352

 

Purpose

1.       To note progress on the forward work programme. (Attachment A). 

2.       To provide a public record of memos, workshop or briefing papers that have been distributed for the Committee’s information since 18 July 2017.

Executive summary

3.       This is regular information-only report which aims to provide public visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo or other means, where no decisions are required.

4.       The following papers/memo were circulated to members:

·    15 August 2017 – Preparing for Climate Change : A summary of council activity

·    28 August 2017 – Memo – amendments to the terms of reference for the review of the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012

·    31 August 2017 – Memo re Monthly Global Engagement Activity update.

5.       The workshop papers and any previous documents can be found on the Auckland Council website at the following link: http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

·    at the top of the page, select meeting “Environment and Community Committee” from the drop-down tab and click ‘View’;

·    under ‘Attachments’, select either HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

6.       Note that, unlike an agenda decision report, staff will not be present to answer questions about these items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.

Recommendation/s

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      receive the information report.

 

 


 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Environment and Community Committee Forward Work Programme

141

b

15 August 2017 – Memo - preparing for Climate Change : A summary of council activity (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

28 August 2017 - Memo re: amendments for the review of the terms of reference of the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012  (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

31 August 2017 - Monthly Global Engagement Activity Sept update (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Signatories

Author

Tam White - Senior Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

PDF Creator     

 


Environment and Community Committee

12 September 2017

 

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

 

That the Environment and Community Committee:

a)      exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

 

C1       Indicative Business Case - Whau Community Facilities

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains  information that may prejudice council's ability to negotiate property acquistions or other procurement relating to the proposed developments. 

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

C2       Acquisition of land for open space - Drury

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report identifies land the council seeks to acquire for open space purposes.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 


 

 

 

C3       Acquisition of land for open space - Te Arai

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report identifies land the council seeks to acquire for open space purposes.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

   



[1] The Safeswim programme covers 83 beaches – 69 are regularly monitored. Nine are not monitored because they have consistently very good water quality, and five are not monitored (and subject to permanent ‘no-swimming’ warnings) because they have consistently very poor water quality.

 

[2] Remote sensors are being installed at eight engineered overflow points on the wastewater network in known problem areas. By 1 November 2018, Healthy Waters aims to have an additional 100 remote sensors installed downstream of engineered overflow points on the wastewater network

[3] http://seachange.org.nz/PageFiles/1166/5584_MSP%20summary_WR.pdf.

[4] Future urban areas are identified in the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy adopted by council’s Planning Committee on 4 July 2017.

[5] http://www.productivity.govt.nz/inquiry-content/3254?stage=2

[6] This does not apply to existing projects that are underway, future stages of projects will be subject to this process.

[7] Environment and Community Committee, August (2017) ‘Options to expand revenue streams for sport facilities investment’ [CP2017/12378]