I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Albert-Eden Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 21 September 2021

2.00pm

Via Skype-for-Business

 

Albert-Eden Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Lee Corrick

 

Deputy Chairperson

Margi Watson

 

Members

Graeme Easte

 

 

Rachel Langton

 

 

Julia Maskill

 

 

Will McKenzie

 

 

Christina Robertson

 

 

Kendyl Smith

 

 

(Quorum 4 members)

 

 

 

Michael Mendoza

Democracy Advisor

 

17 September 2021

 

Contact Telephone: (021) 809 149

Email: Michael.mendoza@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

6.1     Acknowledgement - Recent passing of Billy Apple                                         5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          6

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                           7

12        Notice of Motion - Member Christina Robertson – Planning COVID-19 Responses in the Street Environment                                                                                                 9

13        Notice of Motion - Member Christina Robertson - Māori representation at a local board level                                                                                                                    13

14        Indicative Business Case: Aquatic Provision in Albert-Eden Local Board Area 17

15        Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi                                                                                                                             85

16        Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan                       135

17        Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022                                                                                                                  191

18        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015  257

19        Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015                                                                                                                  319

20        Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review        343

21        Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy       405

22        Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on the government's Three Waters reform proposal                                                                                                                      423

23        Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes                                                                                            447

24        Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors' Updates                                           451

25        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                453

26        Board Members' Reports                                                                                          457

27        Albert-Eden Local Board 2021 Governance Forward Work Calendar                 467

28        Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Records                                                        471

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

30        Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public                                                               487

C1       Albert-Eden Local Board feedback to the Establishment Unit Board of the City Centre to Māngere Light Rail Project                                                                      487


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          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.

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)         confirm minutes of its ordinary meeting, held on Tuesday, 17 August 2021, and reconvened on Tuesday, 24 August 2021, as true and correct.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

6.1       Acknowledgement - Recent passing of Billy Apple

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       For the local board to note a formal acknowledgement on the meeting agenda.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The members of the Albert-Eden Local Board wish to acknowledge the recent passing of Billy Apple, a long-time resident of the Albert-Eden Local Board area and renowned painter and sculptor.

3.       In 2012/2013, the Albert-Eden Local Board collaborated with Billy Apple for the following two art works: the Corner Post on Sandringham Road and the Monkey Hill stairs.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      acknowledge the recent passing of Billy Apple, a long-time resident of the Albert-Eden Local Board area and renowned painter and sculptor; his work spanning several decades was honoured when he was conferred as an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit (ONZM) in 2005; and note two local Billy Apple Art works: the Corner Post on Sandringham Road and the Monkey Hill stairs completed in 2012/2013 were a collaboration with the local board; and extend its condolences to Mary and the family.

 

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Albert-Eden Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

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

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

 

10        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.”

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) or Standing Order 1.9.1 (LBS 3.10.17) (revoke or alter a previous resolution) Notices of Motion have been received from <Member Names>  for consideration under items 12 and 13 respectively.

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Notice of Motion - Member Christina Robertson – Planning COVID-19 Responses in the Street Environment

File No.: CP2021/14157

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       Members Christina Robertson and Julia Maskill have given notice of a motion that they wish to propose.

2.       The Notice of Motion, signed by Member Christina Robertson and Member Julia Maskill as seconder, is appended as Attachment A.

 

 

Motion

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      note the motion (AE/2020/97) passed in the 15 September 2020 meeting (Attachment A) to support Covid-19 responses in the street environment.

b)      request Auckland Transport develop plans to enable social distancing and queuing space as proposed in the 15 September 2020 motion, as well as temporary space for safe, socially distanced walking and cycling, to be implemented when Auckland next reaches Alert Level 3.

c)      request Auckland Transport plan to proactively reinstate these measures if future increases in alert levels are announced (or, if a move to Alert Level 4 is announced without sufficient lead time, as soon as practicable under Alert Level 3).

d)      request Auckland Transport work with interested businesses to temporarily reallocate space in the street environment for outdoor dining and/or queuing space when Auckland reaches Alert Level 2, noting that indoor dining capacity under the updated Level 2 rules is substantially restricted.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachment

No.

Title

Page

a

Notice of Motion - Member Christina Robertson – Planning COVID-19 Responses in the Street Environment

11

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Notice of Motion - Member Christina Robertson - Māori representation at a local board level

File No.: CP2021/14159

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       Members Christina Robertson and Julia Maskill have given notice of a motion that they wish to propose.

2.       The Notice of Motion, signed by Member Christina Robertson and Member Julia Maskill as seconder, is appended as Attachment A.

 

 

Motion

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      note the Governing Body's feedback (on 26 August 2021) supporting in principle the establishment of Māori wards; and

b)      request staff to advise on possible future mechanisms for guaranteeing Māori representation on local boards.

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachment

No.

Title

Page

a

Notice of Motion – Member Christina Robertson - Māori representation at a local board level

15

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Indicative Business Case: Aquatic Provision in Albert-Eden Local Board Area

File No.: CP2021/13300

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To consider an indicative business case for the continued provision of aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Funding is included in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 for a new aquatic facility in the Whau Local Board area, to address a gap in services identified in the community needs investigation for Central West Auckland (comprising of the Whau area, the eastern fringe of the Waitākere area and the western suburbs of the AlbertEden area).

3.       The 2015 Framework Agreement which sets the governance model for Mt Albert Aquatic Centre, requires Auckland Council to investigate how to maintain aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden in the future. The need for on-going aquatic provision in Albert-Eden was established in 2017 by the community needs investigation for Central West Auckland.

4.       Staff have developed an indicative business case to inform decision-making on future provision of aquatic services in Albert-Eden.

5.       Five solutions to maintain aquatic services in Albert-Eden were considered:

·    Option 0: Status quo (provision at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre)

·    Option 1: Expansion of Mt Albert Aquatic Centre to improve pool capacity, access and parking

·    Option 2: New aquatic facility integrated with Mt Albert Community and Leisure Centre

·    Option 3: Smaller new aquatic facility on council-owned land, retaining access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

·    Option 3.1: Larger new aquatic facility on council-owned land, no community access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre.

6.       Staff recommend continuing delivering aquatic services using Mt Albert Aquatic Centre (Option 0). The facility can operate long-term: it is in satisfactory condition and has a 50-year Licence to Occupy to 2048, plus two rights of renewal.

7.       No investment in expanding Mt Albert Aquatic Centre or in building a new aquatic facility is required to maintain aquatic services in Albert-Eden in the short-to-medium term.

8.       This recommendation is based on an investigation of community needs, an assessment of strategic alignment and an economic analysis.

·    The investigation of community needs confirms the need to maintain aquatic provision in Albert-Eden as demand is expected to increase with population growth and changing preferences.

·    There is a strong strategic case to maintain aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden. It aligns with national and local strategic objectives and contributes to Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes. It responds to a clear investment logic.

·    There is a weak economic case to invest in expanding the existing facility or building a new one. Solutions other than the status quo require large capital investments and only provide net benefits 30 years after investment at the earliest. This is because all investment options deliver capacity that exceeds anticipated demand over the next 30 years.

9.       As required in the 2015 Framework Agreement, staff are working with partners to identify and implement a solution to address operational issues associated with shared parking and access at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre.

10.     Mt Albert Aquatic Centre is near, or at capacity with near 370,000 annual visitors. The facility’s ability to meet demand in the medium-term is highly dependent on a new aquatic centre in Whau, anticipated to open around 2028. Demand for aquatic services is likely to outstrip Mt Albert Aquatic Centre capacity again from 2033.

11.     Staff recommend that community needs for aquatic services in Albert-Eden be investigated in 2029/30 or earlier if the planned aquatic facility in Whau is delayed.

12.     The next step is for staff to report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in September 2021. The report will include feedback from Albert-Eden Local Board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the indicative business case for aquatic provision in Albert-Eden, which found that:

i)        there is a need for on-going aquatic services provision in the Albert-Eden Local Board area

ii)       Mt Albert Aquatic Centre can operate long-term as it is in satisfactory condition and operates under a 50-year license to occupy to 2048, plus one right of renewal for 25 years to 2073, and then a further final option to renew for a term to be agreed by the parties

iii)      there is a weak economic case for investment to expand Mt Albert Aquatic Centre or to build a new facility in the Albert-Eden Local Board area

iv)      Mt Albert Aquatic Centre is near, or at capacity

v)      the facility’s ability to meet future demand for aquatic services in the medium-term is highly dependent on the planned aquatic facility in the Whau Local Board area

vi)      capacity is anticipated to become an issue again at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre from 2033 as population growth drives demand.

b)      support that no further investigation of investment options to maintain aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area as part of a detailed business case be undertaken

c)      support maintaining the delivery of aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre (Option 0: Status quo)

d)      support that no investment in expanding Mt Albert Aquatic Centre or in building a new aquatic facility is required to maintain aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area until further work as per resolution e) below

e)      support adding the following action to the Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP) Action Plan: “Investigate community needs for aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area” for delivery in 2029/30 or earlier if the planned aquatic centre in the Whau Local Board area is delayed.

 

Horopaki

Context

A long-term solution for aquatic facilities in Mt Albert is a priority for Albert-Eden Local Board

13.     Mt Albert Aquatic Centre was developed in partnership between Auckland Council, Mt Albert Grammar School, Ministry of Education, and the Mt Albert Grammar School Community Swimming Pool Trust.

14.     A Framework Agreement developed in 2015 sets a new governance model for the facility. It establishes a requirement for Auckland Council to investigate how to maintain aquatic services provision in the Albert-Eden area in the future.

15.     Albert-Eden Local Board has been advocating for the continuing provision of aquatic facilities. One of the key initiatives in the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2020, under “Outcome 5: Parks and community facilities meet a wide range of needs” is to:

   “Continue to advocate to the Governing Body through the council’s 10-year Budget process for a replacement pool in Mt Albert or another appropriate Albert-Eden site.”

The need for continued aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden was previously established

16.     A community needs investigation for Central West Auckland carried out in 2017 examined aquatic and leisure service provision in an area comprising the Whau Local Board area, the eastern fringe of the Waitākere Local Board area and the western suburbs of the AlbertEden Local Board area.

17.     The investigation established the need for:

·     a new aquatic and leisure facility in the Whau area to address gaps in services and support growth

·     on-going aquatic provision in the Albert-Eden area to maintain service levels now and into the future.

18.     Funding is included in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 for a new aquatic facility in Whau. The facility is anticipated to open by 2028.

19.     An indicative business case has been developed to consider the case for investment to maintain aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden. The indicative business case is provided in Attachment A.

Indicative business cases provide evidence to support decision-making

20.     Auckland Council uses a three-step process to investigate large-scale capital projects and new investment in community facilities or services. This approach is based on the business cases model developed by New Zealand Treasury.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Council’s methodology for investment

We are here
 

 


Staff recommend not progressing to the detailed business case phase

21.     The first step begins with a needs assessment and aims to ascertain whether there is or will be a gap in provision. This entails:

·    research into the profile of the community

·    a summary of recent social research

·    a community facility stocktake (both council and non-council facilities)

·    a gap analysis which assesses current provision against Auckland Council policy.

22.     The second step is an indicative business case. It considers the merits of any proposed investment and provides decision makers with an early indication of a preferred way forward. The indicative business case:

·    confirms the need for provision or investment and need for change

·    outlines how the proposal aligns with the organisation’s strategic intent

·    considers the feasibility of a range of options, which includes comparing their costs and benefits in the view to ensure value for money.

23.     The third step is a detailed business case. It recommends a preferred option that optimises value for money and seeks approval from decision makers to finalise the arrangements for successful implementation.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

24.     Staff have prepared an indicative business case for the continued provision of aquatic services in Albert-Eden. It comprises a needs assessment, a strategic case and an economic case. The key findings are outlined below.

The need to maintain aquatic services provision in the Albert-Eden Local Board area is confirmed

25.     There is an existing and growing need for aquatic services in Albert-Eden.

26.     Demand is driven by a growing and changing population:

·    The Albert-Eden Local Board area was home to 98,622 residents in 2018.

·    The majority of residents in 2018 were of European descent (59.7 per cent) and 32.0 per cent identified as Asian ethnicity (compared to 28.2 per cent in Auckland).

·    The population is becoming increasingly ethnically diverse. Albert-Eden’s Asian population has increased by 6,249 people, or 24.7 per cent, between the 2013 and the 2018 census.

·    The resident population is expected to increase from near 100,000 to over 150,000 people over the next 30 years.

·    Population will grow by an average of 1.8 per cent per year between 2021 and 2028 and by an average of 1.2 per cent per year between 2028 and 2057.

·    This growth rate is not as fast as the Auckland average of 2.6 per cent over the next 30 years.

Mt Albert Aquatic Centre provides aquatic services to Albert-Eden residents 

27.     Current aquatic services in Central West Auckland (study area shaded purple in the map below) are largely provided by Mt Albert Aquatic Centre. Other facilities servicing the Albert-Eden population include Olympic Aquatic Centre, Tepid Baths, Cameron pool, the privately-owned Mt Eden pool as well as learn-to-swim providers.

28.     The planned facility in Whau (illustrated by a black dot in the map below) will also be within a short distance to Mt Albert residents.

Figure 2: Current and planned aquatic provision


Note: The black circle shows the potential catchment for the planned facility in Whau for which the exact location is not known yet. The location shown in the figure above is illustrative only.

Mt Albert Aquatic Centre can operate long-term 

29.     An asset assessment carried out in 2019 found Mt Albert Aquatic Centre to be in satisfactory condition. A $3.2m upgrade in 2015 plus regular maintenance and renewal mean that it can operate long-term.

30.     The facility received numerous awards post-improvements, winning the New Zealand Recreation Association Outstanding Pool of the Year 2017 and the Innovation Award Winner 2017 and 2018.

31.     It is owned by the Mt Albert Grammar School Community Swimming Pool Trust (or the Pool Trust, an Auckland Council-controlled organisation) under a 50-year Licence to Occupy to 2048, plus one right of renewal for 25 years to 2073, and then a further final option to renew for a term to be agreed by the parties.

32.     The facility is near, or at capacity, with near 370,000 annual visits. Demand projections suggest that the facility:

·    is unlikely to meet increased short-term demand for aquatic services between 2021 and 2028

·    will be able to meet medium-term demand from 2028 as a new aquatic facility in the Whau area opens and displaces around 70,600 visits a year from Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

·    is likely to reach capacity again from around 2033 and therefore unable to meet long-term demand.

There is a strong strategic case to maintain aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden

33.     The investment proposal is: “to maintain aquatic services provision in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.”

34.     The investment proposal aligns with national and local strategic objectives and contributes to Auckland Plan 2050 outcomes.

35.     It responds to a clear investment logic as shown below.

Figure 3: Investment Logic Map

Note: Percentages refer to weight given to each problem or investment objectives

The findings of the indicative business case are presented graphically below


 

Five options were short-listed

36.     Five options were short-listed from a long list to maintain aquatic provision in Albert-Eden:

·        Option 0: Status quo

·        Option 1: Expansion of Mt Albert Aquatic Centre to improve pool capacity, access and parking

·        Option 2: New aquatic facility integrated with Mt Albert Community and Leisure Centre

·        Option 3: Smaller new aquatic facility on council-owned land, retaining access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

·        Option 3.1: Larger new aquatic facility on council-owned land, no community access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre.

37.     Option 1 is contingent on all Pool Trust partners agreeing to further developing the facility.

There is a weak economic case for investment  

38.     All investment options were assessed against the status quo option as part of a cost benefit analysis, concluding to a weak economic case to expand the current facility or to invest in a new facility.

39.     The cost benefit analysis reached several conclusions:

·        Option 1: Expansion of Mt Albert Aquatic Centre has the highest a benefit cost ratio: for every dollar spent, $1.15 in measured benefits is expected to be realised. Benefits are expected to outweigh costs from 2055, or 30 years after investment. This is because expanding Mt Albert Aquatic Centre creates an over-supply of aquatic services as illustrated by the red line in Figure 4. 

·        Option 2: New aquatic facility integrated with Mt Albert Community and Leisure Centre is not expected to deliver benefits substantially higher than costs, with a benefit cost ratio of 1.02. Again, benefits outweigh benefits more than 30 years after investment.

·        The remaining options deliver no value for money. Costs of provision for Option 3 and Option 3.1, proposing a new aquatic and leisure facility on council-owned land, outweigh benefits.

·        Overall results vary only marginally when assumptions such as visitor numbers displaced by the new facility in the Whau area and construction costs are adjusted in a sensitivity analysis.

Table 1: Net present value and benefit cost ratio for each option

 

Capital costs

Net present value

Benefit cost ratio

Option 1

Expansion of Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

$21.9 m

$2.9 m

1.15

Option 2

New aquatic facility integrated with Mt Albert Community and Leisure Centre

$27.7 m

$0.4 m

1.02

Option 3

Smaller new aquatic facility on council-owned land, retaining access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

$40.0 m

-$8.0 m

0.78

Option 3.1

Larger new aquatic facility on council-owned land, no community access to Mt Albert Aquatic Centre

$42.9 m

-$9.0 m

0.77

*Highest values in green, lowest values in red
Source: MartinJenkins, 2021.

 

 


 

Figure 4: Comparison of demand for aquatic services in Albert-Eden to capacity options

 

Source: MartinJenkins, 2021.

The investment options compare unfavourably to other local projects   

40.     Benefit-cost ratios for the four investment options compare unfavourably to those for recent investment proposals using the same methodology.

41.     Table 2 provides a comparison of the Mt Albert Aquatic provision cost-benefit analysis results with four Auckland Council Local Board projects assessed in 2019 and 2020.

Table 2: Comparison of the Mt Albert Aquatic investment options with other projects

Project

Net present value

Benefit cost ratio

Capital cost

Mt Albert aquatic centre investment options

Option 1

$2.9 m

1.15

$21.9 m

Option 2

$0.4 m

1.02

$27.7 m

Option 3

-$8.0 m

0.78

$40.0 m

Option 3.1

-$9.0 m

0.77

$42.9 m

“One Local Initiative” projects

Henderson-Massey – Destination aquatic centre

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Option 5

$108.5 m

$72.9 m

$67.8 m

$67.9 m

3.71

2.92

2.61

2.71

$53.5 m

$53.3 m

$65.7 m

$57.4 m

Rodney indoor sport facility (Kumeu/Huapai)

$14.6 m

1.8

$10.5 m

Upper Harbour indoor sport facility (Whenuapai)

$50.0 m

2.7

$18.5 m

Manurewa Community facility and sports field upgrade

Partial option

$1.7 m

1.3

$5.5 m

Full option

-$3.5 m

0.7

$11.9 m

Franklin – Karaka sports park upgrade

Partial option

$2.1 m

1.1

$18.4 m

Full option

-$14.4 m

0.6

$40.4 m

Source: MartinJenkins, 2021.

All options but the status quo provide benefits to the school

42.     Mt Albert Grammar School has reported several issues related to the aquatic facility. These are included in the Investment Logic Map.

43.     Addressing those issues would provide benefits to the school. Those benefits cannot be quantified but are assessed below.

Table 3: Benefits assessment

Option 0

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Option 3.1

Safety benefits associated with no longer sharing a driveway

None

High

High

High

High

Benefits from increased parking

None

High

High

High

High

Better utilisation of school property

None

No

Medium

Medium

Medium

Greater access to pool lanes for training and games

None

Low

High

Medium

High

Address school’s concerns

None

Low

High

Medium

High

Source: Adapted from MartinJenkins, 2021.

44.     All investment options provide benefits to the school. The status quo option does not.

45.     With a fast-growing roll, space on school ground is in short supply. Options for which there is no community access to the current facility (options 2 and 3.1) deliver the highest level of benefits to the school. Option 1 does not address the school’s concern regarding better utilisation of school property and the school might not be amenable to an expansion of the existing pool.

Staff have developed criteria to assess the five options

46.     Staff developed assessment criteria to enable the comparison of the options in line with New Zealand Treasury’s Better Business Case framework.

Table 4: Success Factors

Success factor

Description

 

 

Strategic fit

Meets Auckland Council strategic intent and contributes to Auckland Plan outcomes by ensuring continued aquatic services provision in Albert-Eden in the future

 

Business needs

Fulfil the current and future needs for aquatic and leisure services in the local catchment

 

Value for money

Provides the highest cost-benefit ratio, benefit levels being dependent on the size of the catchment served by the facility

 

Address school’s concerns

Addresses Mt Albert Grammar School’s concerns regarding accessway, car parking, access to lanes and better use of the site

The status quo fares the best against the success factors

47.     A summary of the options assessed against the success factors is provided in the table below.

48.     Option 1 Expansion of Mt Albert Aquatic Centre is the best of the four investment options. However, it delivers low value for money, with a benefit cost ratio of 1.15 and net benefits 30 years after investment. Furthermore, Option 1 does no address school issues and is therefore unlikely to gain the necessary traction amongst the Pool Trust’s partners. It is therefore not a preferred option.

49.     The other investment options are discarded as they provide no to very low value for money.

50.     The assessment concludes to Option 0 being the preferred option, noting short-term capacity constraints.


 

Table 5: Assessment against success factors

Option 0

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Option 3.1

Strategic fit

High

High

High

High

High

Business needs

Met, but some short-term capacity constraints

Met

Met

Met

Met

Value for money

No investment

Low

Very low

No

No

Address school’s concerns

No*

Low

High

Medium

High

Overall assessment

Preferred option

Not a preferred option

Not a preferred option

Not a preferred option

Not a preferred option

* Staff and partners are currently investigating alternative solutions to address school’s operational concerns.

Staff recommend maintaining the status quo and further investigating service gap in 2029/30

51.     Staff recommend Option 0: Status quo as the preferred option to continue using Mt Albert Aquatic Centre to deliver aquatic services in the Albert-Eden area.

52.     Mt Albert Aquatic Centre can continue to operate long-term. The facility is in satisfactory condition and has a 50-year Licence to Occupy, plus two rights of renewal.

53.     This indicative business case has highlighted likely capacity issues at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre in the long-term. Staff recommend that a community needs investigation for aquatic services in the Albert-Eden Local Board area be carried out in 2029/30 or earlier if the planned facility in the Whau area is delayed. This will provide an evidence base to address potential gap in aquatic services and plan for future investment.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

54.     There is no climate impact associated with the recommendations in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

55.     Staff from Parks Sport and Recreation, Service Strategy and Integration, and Service and Asset Planning were involved in the development of this report.

56.     The indicative business case in Attachment A was reviewed by the Chief Economist Unit and the General Manager: Value for Money.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

57.     Albert-Eden Local Board advocates for the continuing provision of aquatic facilities in Mt Albert based on the outcome of the Framework Agreement Mt Albert Aquatic Centre 2015. This agreement set a 10-year expectation to find a way of providing aquatic provision in the Central West area into the future.

58.     In 2016 the Albert-Eden Local Board requested officers to progress investigation for a continued long-term need for aquatic provision in the Mt Albert area, including options analysis, site assessment, and estimating cost implications.

59.     One of the key initiatives in the Albert-Eden Local Board Plan 2020, under “Outcome 5: Parks and community facilities meet a wide range of needs” is to “continue to advocate to the Governing Body through the council’s 10-year Budget process for a replacement pool in Mt Albert or another appropriate Albert-Eden site.”

60.     Continued aquatic provision in the Albert-Eden area would deliver a range of benefits to users as well as to the wider community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

61.     Central West Auckland has a slightly lower percentage of Māori (7 per cent) compared to the Auckland average (11 per cent). Māori, in general, are more active, younger and are over-represented on the deprivation index compared to the general population. The provision of affordable sport opportunities is important to this group.

62.     In 2018, just over 50 per cent of Māori in Auckland were physically active. Of those who are physically active, 14.3 per cent participate in swimming.

63.     The lack of aquatic provision in the local area is a barrier to participation in aquatic services. The transport cost to neighbouring facilities is an issue for lower socio-economic groups. Maintaining provision in the Albert-Eden area means they can continue to participate.

64.     Provision of aquatic services in Central West Auckland will contribute to Māori outcome ‘Priority 2: Whānau and Tamariki Wellbeing’ in the Auckland Plan 2050.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

65.     There is no financial implication from this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

66.     A comprehensive risk assessment has been undertaken. There are multiple risks associated with the options to deliver against the investment proposal, outlined in the table below.

67.     One of the main identified risks is a delay in delivery of the planned aquatic centre in the Whau Local Board area. As discussed as part of the needs assessment Mt Albert Aquatic Centre is unlikely to meet increased demand for aquatic services forecast between 2021 and 2028. Its ability to meet demand from 2028 is entirely dependent on the new Whau facility increasing capacity across the network.

68.     A further risk is that there is no planning to meet long-term demand, as capacity constraint is likely again from 2033. A community needs investigation for aquatic services would ensure gap in provision and solutions to meet demand can be fully considered.

Table 6: Initial risk analysis

Main Risks

Consequence (H/M/L)

Likelihood (H/M/L)

Comments and Risk Management Strategies

Optimism bias

M

H

Conduct sensitivity analysis of cost-benefit results.

Delay in delivery of the Whau aquatic centre

H

M

The Whau aquatic facility is planned for construction in 2025 and expected to open in 2028. This will enable Mt Albert Aquatic Centre to meet demand for the following five years.  Financial constraints or unforeseen circumstances may delay construction. Any delay would have a significant impact on Mt Albert Aquatic Centre’s ability to meet medium-term demand.

No further planning to meet long-term demand

H

M

Analysis shows likely capacity constraints at Mt Albert Aquatic Centre from 2033, five years after the Whau facility opens. A community needs investigation for aquatic services would ensure gap in provision and solutions to meet demand can be fully considered.

Non-mitigation of facility issues with option

H

H

The Framework Agreement that sets the governance structure for Mt Albert Aquatic centre, puts an obligation on Auckland Council to work with the school and Trust to find a solution that establishes a new access point to the pool and additional parking.

Potential for conflicting use with Central Interceptor

M

L

Option 2 (new aquatic facility integrated with Mt Albert Community and Leisure Centre) would require coordination with Watercare if progressed. This is due to the Central Interceptor project occupying the Mt Albert War Memorial carpark from late 2020 to mid-2022, making the site extremely constrained. If the Central Interceptor project is delayed this may have flow-on effects to the Mt Albert Community Centre expansion.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

69.     The next steps are for staff to report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in August 2021. The report will include resolutions from Albert-Eden Local Board.

70.     The Status quo option does not address Mt Albert Grammar School’s issues related to shared parking and access. Under the Framework Agreement for Mt Albert Aquatic Centre, Auckland Council has an obligation to work with the Pool Trust and Mt Albert Grammar School to address current operational issues. Staff are currently investigating alternative solutions.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Aquatic Provision in Albert-Eden Local Board Area - Indicative Business Case

31

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kelsey Hanrahan - Graduate Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Carole Canler - Senior Policy Manager

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Nina Siers – Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi

File No.: CP2021/14031

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide local board feedback on the draft Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The BID Team has implemented a review of the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) Kaupapa Here ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi and supporting documents, as advised in the memo to local board members dated 23 April 2021. The memo can be found on the Auckland Council website, InfoCouncil.

3.       The review sought informal and formal feedback from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council-controlled organisations (CCOs), council departments and other external stakeholders.

4.       The review has focused on strengthening those parts of the policy relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, the financial sustainability of BID programmes.

5.       The review also focused on elected member needs and identifying any political risks and mitigations.

6.       The draft BID Policy (2021) has been before the Finance and Performance committee at a workshop on 18 August 2021. Feedback received has been incorporated into this version of the BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

7.       Staff are now seeking formal feedback from local boards on the draft BID Policy (2021) provided as Attachment A.

8.       Following formal feedback received from local boards, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, CCOs, council departments and other external stakeholders, the final version of the BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be presented to the Finance and Performance Committee for adoption on 9 December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      provide formal feedback on the draft Business Improvement District Policy (2021) and supporting documents by 1 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Overview of the Auckland BID programme

9.       BID-operating business associations are membership-based organisations independent of Auckland Council. The draft BID Policy (2021) supports the independent nature of the BID-operating business associations. They are responsible for the BID programme delivery, its success, and are accountable to BID members/BID affiliates.

10.     Local boards have the primary relationship with BID-operating business associations in their area:

·        Local boards and business associations have a vested interest in a particular place and share similar goals. Working collaboratively achieves greater outcomes.

·        Local boards have significant allocated decision-making responsibility for BID programme establishments, amending existing BID programmes, BID boundary changes, continuation/discontinuation and issue resolution.

11.     Auckland Council requires BID-operating business associations to fully comply with the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (Kaupapa Hereā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) (refer Attachment A).

12.     The BID policy sets out the process for:

·        establishing, continuing/discontinuing BID programmes

·        changes to the BID programme boundary area/map

·        changes to the BID targeted rating mechanism

·        issue resolution

·        key stakeholder roles and responsibilities.

13.     The BID policy includes the engagement and reporting requirements for BID-operating business associations to ensure all BID members/BID affiliates have access to the relevant BID programme information. BID-operating business associations must use their Annual General Meeting (AGM) process to obtain formal member approval for the BID programme delivery, budget, and to confirm their BID targeted rate grant amount for the following financial year.

14.     The BID policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability role council has for monies collected as a public sector organisation. This balance is necessary to sustain public trust and confidence with the Auckland Council BID programme. 

The review

15.     Commencing April 2021, the review of the current policy began with communicating with local boards and all stakeholders involved in the management and operation of BID programmes across Tāmaki Makaurau, both BID-operating and non-BID business associations, council departments and interested parties. The process to date has included informal feedback and comments on the current policy.

16.     The review process focused on strengthening parts of the policy (and updating supporting documents) relating to issue resolution and, following local board feedback, financial sustainability of BID programmes.

17.     The review has also provided the opportunity to clarify the documentation between Auckland Council (collecting the BID targeted rate and the funder) and the BID-operating business association relating to the BID Programme Agreement (2016) document.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Rationale for the review

18.     The primary objective for reviewing the current 2016 policy is a focus on the issue resolution sections. Experience in this space over the last five years has illustrated gaps in the usefulness of the current policy to address and resolve issues in a timely manner.

19.     The review provided an opportunity to update parts of the policy relating to Auckland Council changes in operation, current business practices and where the advancement of technology has contributed to how business is done, for example zoom meetings.

20.     There was also an early opportunity to capture informal feedback from local boards and BID-operating business associations.

21.     The information and informal feedback collected in May, June and July of this year has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy 2021 (Attachment A) and supporting documents (Attachments B and C). A summary of the BID Policy (2021) requirements is provided with this report (Attachment D).

22.     BID programmes are operated by independent business associations, and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. In recognition of their independent status, the BID policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for business association members to determine. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Participants in the review

23.     In addition to local boards, there are a range of stakeholders involved in BID programmes, both internal and external to Auckland Council. The BID team set a programme of informal engagement, outlined in Table 1 below:

Table 1 – Key engagement activity

Stakeholder

Engagement

Dates

BID-operating business associations

Business associations without BID programmes

BID communication including newsletters and emails:

Sent to 50+ BID-operating business associations and other interested parties

March, April, May, June and July 2021

Three network meetings

May, June and July 2021

An average attendance exceeded 20+ BID-operating business associations

Four special workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 23+ BID programmes were represented at each workshop.

Local boards

18 local board workshop presentations

June and July 2021

Introduction memo and BID policy review information

Three special topic workshops - topics included: issue resolution, conflict of interest and developing a board charter

June and July 2021

An average of 16 local board elected members attended each workshop

Local Board Services Division Lead team

Presentation and information feedback received

Presentation on 18 June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee

Memo on BID policy review project

April 2021

Council departments including:

·    Legal Services

·    Connected Communities

·    Ngā Mātārae

·    Risk and Assurance

·    Finance and Policy

·    Local Board Services

Regular meetings, engagement and feedback

May, June, and July 2021

Independent polling agent

 

Engagement and feedback regarding the ballot/polling process

June 2021

Finance and Performance Committee workshop

The draft BID Policy (2021) V1 and support documents were presented and feedback received

18 August 2021

24.     The process to undertake the review of the current policy (2016) takes place from February 2021 to June 2022. Progress to date is set out in Table 2 below:

Table 2 - Progress to date

Date

Progress

2021

Feb/March

·    Project planning, stakeholder communications

April to July

·    Directed consultation with local boards and stakeholders on the current BID policy and identified themes

  issue resolution

  conflicts of interest

  board charter development

May/June

·    Cross council, external engagement and feedback

June/July

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents created

August 18

·    Finance and Performance Committee workshop

August/September

·    Distribution of draft BID Policy (2021) for formal feedback

Informal local board feedback

25.     Discussions with local boards during workshops centred around:

·        issue resolution – how to do this fairly and in a timely manner

·        operational issues – relating to management and governance of BID-operating business associations

·        opportunities for collaboration and cost savings between BIDs

·        elected members involvement with BID-operating business associations

·        growth opportunities for BID-operating business associations

·        continued dependence on local board funding.

Seeking local board formal feedback on the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

26.     Local boards are now being asked to provide formal feedback on a revised draft policy (2021) and support documents (Attachments A, B and C). Local boards are encouraged to engage with BID-operating business associations in their local board area (where relevant/possible) to help to inform this feedback process. 

27.     Any feedback from local boards will help the further development of BID Policy (2021). It would be, however, particularly useful to get local board views on proposed changes set out in Tables 3 and 4 below.

28.     Feedback from local boards, external stakeholders and any further feedback from BID-operating business associations will be reviewed by staff and this will help inform the final version of the policy. Formal feedback can be sent to bids@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

29.     Once the BID Policy 2021 is approved, other support material will be made available on the BID Auckland Council website www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz and include:

·        BID-operating business association constitution (template 2021)

·        BID-operating executive committee board charter (template 2021)

·        individual BID programme area maps

·        BID affiliate/BID business association membership qualification diagram

·        local board BID representative position description

·        template documents, including:

o   AGM agenda

o   AGM minutes

o   BID programme income and expenditure budget (for BID grant $120,000).

Summary of changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

30.     The key proposed changes incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 3:

Table 3 - Key changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Key change from current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Issue resolution

 

Improving the ability to resolve issues with a clear process in a timely manner

An issue is identified as non- compliance with the BID policy

3.5, Requirement 24

BID Programme Funding Agreement (2021) Attachment B

Replaced BID Programme Agreement (2016)

Clarifies the relationship between the parties

3.1, Requirement 18

Size and scale of BID programmes

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000

No change from 2016

Minimum BID targeted rate grant $120,000 remains

A new requirement for legacy BID programmes (11 in total) that currently receive less than $120,000pa to increase their targeted rate up to that amount over the next five years

A variety of options are suggested to achieve this

This requirement is a result of local board feedback on concerns to continually fund non-financially sustainable BID programmes

 

1.4, Requirement 3 and 4

Exceptional or unexpected circumstances

Council may, at its discretion, depart from the requirement set out in section 2.4 (25% of total voting forms must be returned for the ballot to be valid

Council will consider evidence of support to date, what is fair and any impact from amending the voting threshold mandate

 

3.4.2

BID operating business association constitution (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their constitution to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

BID operating executive committee board charter (template 2016)

This supporting document was included as part of the current policy and now removed from the BID Policy (2021)

This allows the business association to amend their board charter to suit their local needs, on the basis it’s not inconsistent with the BID policy

A template document is provided on the www.bid.auckland.govt.nz website

1.1, 2.3.2 Requirement 12

31.     Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) are set out in Table 4 below:

Table 4 - Minor changes made to the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents

Minor changes to current policy

Description

Note

2021 section, page

Other council funding

 

Organisational view on risk regarding BID-operating business association receiving other council funding

The draft BID policy acknowledges other council funding grants allocated to BID-operating business associations

2.3.4, Requirement 16

Local boards – other roles

 

Updated

Refer to elected member conflicts of interest policy

A link to these documents can be found here

2.5.3

BID Annual Accountability Report (2021) Attachment C

Name change from BID Annual Accountability Agreement (2016)

To include BID targeted rate grant amount and copy of AGM resolution

3.2, Requirement 22, Table 2, item 9

Audit – provision for a review audit or full audit

Recognition of increased risk and increased reporting requirement based on the amount of targeted rate received

Set as a sliding scale

BID targeted rate grants less than $200,000pa must commission a review audit

BID targeted rate grants more than $200,000pa must commission a full audit

3.2, Requirement 23, Table 2, item 4

Rating mechanism - flat rate

Lifted the maximum flat rate amount from $500 to $900 per rateable property

To provide more flexibility for BID-operating business associations when considering BID programme budgets and the impact of BID targeted rates on ratepayers

3.1.2

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32.     The BID Policy (2021) focuses on the governance and accountability for BID-operating business associations. Individually the BID programme, through targeted rate-funding, can focus on advocacy and activities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33.     Formal feedback will be sought from other council teams including CCOs and those who work and have an interested in the BID programme and business community space.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

34.     Local boards have engaged with the review of the BID Policy (2016) and their informal feedback has been incorporated into the draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents. Table 1 outlines local board engagement to date.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

35.     Officers are working with Auckland Council’s Ngā Mātārae Unit to ensure that the BID Policy (2021) aligns with the Auckland Council Māori Responsiveness Framework. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     There are no financial implications for local boards under the draft BID Policy (2021).

37.     Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that rohe. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     There are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from the draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents.

39.     The policy describes the balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

40.     The draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents set out the requirements and obligations for BID-operating business associations and are intended to help minimise the potential for business associations to misuse BID targeted rate funds by requiring each BID to plan for their intended use, report on its activities to its members, and to undertake and meet all requirements set out in the policy.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     Following formal feedback received from local boards, CCOs, BID-operating business associations, non-BID business associations, council departments, other external stakeholders and those with an interest in BID programmes, a final BID Policy (2021) and support documents will be updated and the steps outlined in Table 5 below will be completed by the BID team:

Table 5 - Progress to completion

Date

Progress

2021

August

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents updated to post Finance and Performance Committee workshop feedback

Mid-August to 1 October

·    Draft BID Policy (2021) and support documents distributed to local boards, BID-operating business associations, council departments, CCOs and other stakeholders for formal feedback

·    Update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website with feedback link

·    Feedback open 24 August to 1 October

October

·    Update draft BID Policy (2021) and supporting documents incorporating formal feedback

9 December

·    Presentation of final version of BID Policy (2021) and support documents to Finance and Performance Committee meeting

2022

January/February

·    Post Finance and Performance approval actions, communications with local boards, BID-operating business associations, all stakeholders, and update www.bid.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz website

March to June

·    BID Policy (2021) communication, support and advice

·    The BID team will provide assistance to the 50 BID-operating business associations to comply with the BID Policy (2021), including guidance with aligning their individual constitutions and governance documents to meet the timing of their 2022 AGM timeframes

42.     The BID Policy (2021), if approved by the Finance and Performance Committee in December 2021, would become operational on 1 July 2022. 


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft BID Policy (2021)

95

b

BID Funding Agreement

117

c

BID Annual Accountability Report

129

d

Draft BID Policy requirements

131

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan

File No.: CP2021/14037

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support for the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The number and diversity of older Aucklanders is growing, and this creates challenges and opportunities for improving the age-friendliness of our environment, infrastructure, and services now and in the future.

3.       Older people experience barriers to participation across all areas of life.

4.       The draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua Action Plan (Action Plan) is our commitment to supporting older Aucklanders to participate fully in their communities.

5.       It is a region-wide, cross-sector plan that commits the council, council-controlled organisations (CCOs) and sector partners to improve outcomes for older Aucklanders through the delivery of tangible and meaningful short, medium and long-term actions. 

6.       To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

7.       Engagement with kaumātua and whānau to hear what is important to Māori led to the development of our unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework. The Framework combines the WHO domains with Te Ao Māori concepts and reflects the bicultural identity of Aotearoa and the diversity of Tāmaki Makaurau.

8.       Many activities within the plan will benefit people of all ages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

9.       The Action Plan is constrained by actions needing to be delivered within existing resources, or as and when new funding can be secured. Greater or quicker impact could be possible in the future if budget is not such a limitation.

10.     By working together council and cross-sector partners can, however, leverage resources to achieve greater collective impact and prioritise efforts to where it is needed most.

11.     Over time the plan will help create an age-friendly lens that becomes embedded in the way council and partners design and deliver services and infrastructure. This will result in ongoing and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

12.     Community engagement on the draft Action Plan is underway and will be completed in September 2021.  

13.     The final Action Plan will be reported to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for adoption in November 2021.

14.     The adopted Action Plan will enable Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland to join the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities.

 

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      support the draft Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan.

Horopaki

Context

15.     Auckland Council has a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people, because:

·   Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland is home to New Zealand’s largest population of older people[1] - this number will more than double between 2018 and 2043

·   of the current 65+ population, most are well-placed but some face hardship and this will increase[2] 

·   diversity in life stage, needs and abilities, culture, language, living situation and financial stability affect how older people contribute and participate in the community.

16.     In view of this, in July 2018 Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee resolved to become an Age-friendly City and seek membership to the World Health Organisation’s Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities (ENV/2018/88).

17.     The network includes cities that are committed to supporting each other and creating inclusive and accessible environments for all people to enjoy. It identifies eight interconnected domains of urban life that contribute to improving the wellbeing and participation of older people.

18.     To obtain membership to the network, council has led a process to develop a region-wide cross-sector Action Plan that will deliver over 80 actions to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. 

19.     To develop the Action Plan, staff listened to over 3,000 Aucklanders who shared their thoughts on what is needed to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

20.     The Action Plan has been created to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to the diverse needs of Auckland’s growing and increasingly more diverse ageing population.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The problem/opportunity

21.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s older population is growing faster than any other age-group and faces challenges and barriers to participation across all areas of life.

22.     Our older people are taonga, and deserve to live full, meaningful lives where they can participate and are valued for the contribution they make to our communities. 

Our services and infrastructure need to respond and adapt to older peoples’ diverse needs

23.     Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s growing and increasingly diverse ageing population means we need short-term as well as longer-term, system-level solutions to ensure older people can actively participate in their communities now and in the future.

24.     The burden on the environment, infrastructure and on services such as healthcare will expand exponentially as the older population grows to a projected 432,800 Aucklanders by 2043. To enable older people to live active and full lives in Tāmaki Makaurau, we need to ensure infrastructure, activities and services are developed or adapted to respond to their diverse needs.

Older Aucklanders told us they face challenges related to accessibility across all areas including public space, buildings, transport, and housing options

25.     Older people told us they need:

Older Aucklanders can find it difficult to access information and to keep up to date with technology

26.     Older people told us they need:

Older people can feel invisible, disconnected, and discouraged from taking an active role in their community

27.     Older people told us they need:

Our response to the problem/opportunity

28.     The development of Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan (Attachment A).

29.     This is a cross-sector action plan that responds to the diverse needs and aspirations of older Aucklanders to improve their wellbeing and quality of life; and to make Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland a more age-friendly region.

Strengths

A cross-sector action plan will deliver collective impact in an innovative, sustainable, and equitable way

30.     Auckland Council has worked with a range of organisations and communities who are active in advancing the wellbeing of older Aucklanders including:

·   nineteen organisations with different specialities, such as health, recreation, and housing

·   regional and local organisations, ensuring a breadth of reach across communities.

31.     Together we identified and developed actions that will address the challenges and opportunities raised by older Aucklanders. This approach:

·   enables collaboration between the council, aged-sector organisations, and communities

·   creates opportunities to leverage resources and deliver greater collective impact over time.

·   develops an action platform for organisations to build upon

·   encourages interest and participation from other organisations to be part of delivery

·   recognises that improving the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland relies on many different groups and agencies playing their part

·   ensures the delivery of actions that have impact for older Aucklanders of all ethnicities, abilities, and beliefs.

32.     It is anticipated that having a shared vision for an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau will continue to build momentum within the organisations who are responsible for delivering actions.

33.     The intent is that over time an age-friendly lens will become embedded in the way council and partners design and develop services and infrastructure across the region.

34.     The result of this will be ongoing action and incremental change that makes a tangible impact on the lives of older people.

The Action Plan includes a mixture of over 80 new and existing actions

35.     Impact will be delivered through a mix of short, medium, and long-term actions. They are spread across all ten domains, but not equally.

36.     Some domains have more actions than others, for example the Housing Domain has fewer actions than the Respect and Social Inclusion Domain. This is because some things, such as refurbishing Haumaru Housing units take time and money to implement whereas supporting community-led social activities can use existing resource or may build upon activities that are already happening.

37.     Council’s actions are primarily focused in the areas where most council services are provided. These are:

·   Te Taiao; council maintains outdoor spaces and facilities for the community,

·   Respect and Social Inclusion; council hosts region-wide and local community events and activities that foster belonging and inclusion for diverse Aucklanders, and

·   Communication and Information; council informs communities about what is happening and offers support through libraries and community centres.

It has a unique Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework to reflect our bicultural foundations 

38.     Staff developed the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework in response to feedback from kaumātua.

39.     The framework provides a holistic way to frame the plan that integrates the WHO domains with Te Whare Tapa Whā- a Māori wellbeing framework - and Te Ao Māori values.

40.     It includes two additional domains and expanded another:

·   Culture and Diversity and Kaumātua and Kuia domains were added to reflect Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s diversity and bicultural foundations

·   The WHO Domain of Outdoor Spaces and Buildings was expanded to become Te Taiao, representing the natural and built environment.

41.     The framework is unique to Tāmaki Makaurau. It ensures the actions within the plan are meaningful, achievable, and impactful for older Aucklanders.

42.     The framework will continue to be used to guide how we collectively improve and evaluate the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

The Action Plan will have a wider community and intergenerational impact

43.     The actions within the plan will benefit older people and others in the community now and, in the future. For example, ensuring all buses are accessible will benefit small tamariki (children) and disabled community members.

44.     Many activities within the plan benefit people of all ages and stages and what we do now to improve older Aucklander’s accessibility and quality of life will also benefit future generations.

Diagram

Description automatically generated

Constraints and limitations 

It will take time to see the full, long-term impacts of the Action Plan

45.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will deliver impact but that will happen over time.

46.     Some actions are small and local and will not have significant or regional impact. However, there is opportunity for these local activities to be expanded as the age-friendly vision and plan gains traction.

47.     Some actions will be delivered immediately or are in progress, others will take time. For instance, making roads, buildings and parks more accessible will be achieved over time, subject to the roll-out of relevant capital works and renewal programmes.  

Council, CCOs and partner organisations are constrained by the financial impact of COVID-19 and operating within existing budget and resources

48.     The Action Plan has been developed on the basis that everyone is operating in a constrained financial environment and actions will be delivered within existing resources.

49.     The current assumption is that:

·   no additional budget will be available

·   where new funding is required, it will need to be reprioritised from elsewhere, secured through grants, or considered through budget-setting processes.

50.     Consequently, the first one to five years of the action plan focus on existing or new actions that are easier and more affordable to carry out within existing budgets.

51.     There is potential for this to change as the Action Plan evolves and if more funding becomes available in the medium to long term (5-10 years).

Success relies on cooperation, ongoing commitment, and resources to support collaboration

52.     The Action Plan relies on the dedication and commitment of council and partner organisations working together to improve the age-friendliness of Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland:

·   many of the partner organisations are community-led with limited capacity and dependant on ongoing public funding

·   larger entities and agencies (including government and council departments) may have competing priorities

·   success is dependent on all parties continuing to prioritise age-friendly outcomes and delivering the actions they have developed.

53.     Resources will also be needed to support sector collaboration. It will take time and effort to facilitate organisations working together and supporting each other to build an age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau. 

54.     As part of council’s commitment to the plan, council staff will play a key backbone role in keeping the Action Plan alive, bringing partners together, and monitoring implementation and impact.    

Community views

55.     Staff undertook extensive community engagement in 2019-2020 to ensure the voices of diverse older Aucklanders were at heart of the plan. We developed surveys, held workshops across the region, hui with kaumātua and had one-on-one interviews with rainbow community members.

56.     Targeted engagement was facilitated by Age Concern, Toa Pacific, New Zealand Indian Senior Citizens Association, Hindu Elders Foundation Inc and The Selwyn Foundation to ensure we heard the diverse voices of older Aucklanders.

57.     Over 3,000 people shared their vision for an Age-friendly Auckland and told council what actions they think will support older people to live full, active and healthy lives.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

58.     During our engagement we heard, particularly from kaumātua, that environmental wellbeing was missing from the WHO framework. The wellbeing of the natural environment is important to our own wellbeing, and we have a role in looking after our environment in all its forms.

59.     In response, we have expanded the existing WHO Domain Outdoor Spaces and Buildings to include Te Taiao (the natural environment), to recognise that the environment’s wellbeing and our own are connected.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

60.     This Action Plan includes actions developed with CCOs including Auckland Transport.

61.     The Seniors Advisory Panel acted as kaitiaki throughout the process, providing advice, guidance and feedback and contributing to workshops and action planning sessions.

62.     The Seniors Advisory Panel will continue to provide support and guidance on the Action Plan as it is delivered.

63.     Auckland Council, Seniors Advisory Panel and CCOs are aware of the impacts of the Action Plan and their role in implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

64.     Local boards have a strong interest in the wellbeing of older people. All local boards have outcomes that foster social inclusion and participation among their residents, and many have age-friendly specific goals and actions.

65.     Community engagement was held at locations across the region in 2019-2020, from Warkworth to Pukekohe.

66.     Two reports were produced on the findings, the Community Engagement Findings Report and the Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Report.[3] These were shared with elected members, stakeholders, and the community. These reports were also published on the council Age-friendly website.

67.     Staff attended local board workshops in August and September 2021 to share the draft Action Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

68.     The Action Plan is relevant to Māori as tangata whenua and kaitiaki of the sky, land and sea and supports the Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome within the Auckland Plan 2050

69.     In the 2018 Census older Māori made up over four per cent of the Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland over-65 population.

70.     Older Māori have lower levels of equity, income and rely heavily on superannuation. Actions that are focused on kaumātua delivered by Māori organisations and others will make a positive impact on wellbeing.

71.     The involvement of kaumātua, whānau and organisations has been influential on the design of the Framework, work on implementation; and ensuring this is a living document.

Engagement to better understand the needs of kaumātua and Te Ao Māori

72.     To ensure the Action Plan is relevant and effective for kaumātua, mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to a dedicated hui in February 2020. The hui was organised in partnership with Te Kōtahi a Tāmaki and hosted at Manurewa Marae.

Recognition of tangata whenua, hauora Māori concepts and Te Tiriti o Waitangi are important to kaumātua

73.     Kaumātua also told us:

·   Importance of building and marae accessibility – safety of our kaumātua

·   Utilising marae more e.g., events, programmes, line dancing, tai chi, learning Te Reo

·   Age-appropriate housing design

·   More disability parking

·   More Te Reo visible everywhere

·   Environmental recognition – care for Papatūānuku and te taiao incorporated into plan

·   Sport and recreation options available for older people and open areas for activities

·   Affordable digital communication.

74.     Te ao Māori values from the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s (IMSB) Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau are also imbedded in the Framework:

·   Whanaungatanga (Develop Vibrant Communities), in relation to the different opportunities to engage and participate in their own and other cultures.

·   Rangatiratanga (Enhance Leadership and Participation), in relation to the activities under Respect and Social Inclusion.

·   Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life), in relation to the Action Plan’s outcome of improving the hauora of older Aucklanders.

·   Wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori.

·   Kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to protecting Te Taiao now and in the future.

75.     These values underpin the way people and organisations will work together to deliver this plan with, and for, our communities.

76.     The Action Plan supports the IMSB’s Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 by addressing social, cultural, environmental and wellbeing for Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

77.     The Age-friendly Tāmaki Makaurau Framework incorporates the WHO framework, Te Whare Tapa Whā and te ao Māori. The unique Framework contributes to the awareness, education and understanding of Māori perspectives. 

78.     Mana whenua and mataawaka will have an opportunity to provide further feedback during public engagement on the Action Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

79.     The Action Plan has been designed to be delivered within the existing budgets and resources of council, CCOs and sector partners.

80.     Where additional investment is desired by Auckland Council to implement new or joint actions this will need be considered through Long-term Plan or Annual Plan processes.

81.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the Action Plan.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

Adoption of a new plan may create expectations that there will be additional budget to support age-friendly outputs.

All public-facing communications and guidance about the new plan will reference that actions will be funded from existing budgets. Where new funding is required, this will be sought through grants and processes such as the long-term plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

82.     Public engagement for the Action Plan is expected to be completed by the end of September 2021.

83.     A summary of all feedback, including from local boards, and a final Action Plan will be reported for adoption by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in November 2021.

84.     Following adoption of the Action Plan, staff will seek membership to the WHO network.

85.     An annual progress report will provide details on the impact and success of our actions. This will include an update on the delivery of actions against the identified measures of success, high-level wellbeing indicators and examples of good and promising practice. This will be presented to the Governing Body, the WHO and shared with all organisations supporting delivery. 

86.     The Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua – Age-friendly Auckland Action Plan will be reviewed every five years.

87.     Baseline research was carried out in 2017 - The Older Aucklanders: A Quality of Life Status Report. The research is across the domains that contribute to quality of life and wellbeing. This research is being conducted this year and will be carried out every five years to help monitor progress and guide the development of future actions.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Tāmaki Tauawhi Kaumātua - Age-Friendly Tāmaki Makaurau (draft)

145

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Cleo Matthews - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - General Manager - Community and Social Policy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2021/13007

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example footpaths, local parks and civic spaces) by continuing to regulate trading, events and filming activities.

4.       Council received responses from 75 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

Proposal 2

Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

Proposal 3

Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

Proposal 4

Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 20 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places

8.       The current Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 / Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui 2015 seeks to protect public safety, minimise nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places caused by trading activities, events and filming.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The current Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

·    Reserves Act 1997, Resource Management Act 1991, Food Act 2014, Road User Rule 2004, Trespass Act 1980, Fair Trading Act 1986, Customer Guarantees Act 1993, Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010 and Auckland Unitary Plan

·    Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013, Signage Bylaw 2015, Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and Waste Management and Minimisitaion Bylaw 2019

·    Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.

11.     The current Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022 and council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko, Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/51).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14.     The proposal helps to minimise safety risks, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places (for example, in local parks, reserves and civic spaces) by:

·    continuing to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

·    clarifying the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are

·    clarifying which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw

·    updating the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 59 people and 16 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 525 hits.[4]

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

18.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·   indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·   recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

19.     A total of two people and two organisations from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal. There was split support for Proposals One and Two and majority support for Proposals Three and Four. Proposals Three and Four had similar support to the totals from all people who provided feedback while Proposal One and Two had less.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal

Total support from local board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:        Continue to regulate trading, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw.

25 per cent support

25 per cent opposed

50 per cent ‘other’

66 per cent

(40/61 submitters)

2:        Clarify the need for rental micromobility devices to be approved under their own licence instead of a mobile shop licence as they currently are.

50 per cent support

50 per cent ‘other’

74 per cent

(46/62 submitters)

3:        Clarify which activities require an approval, don’t require an approval as long as certain conditions are met, and are not addressed in the Bylaw.

100 per cent support

75 per cent

(44/59 submitters)

4:        Update the title, structure, format, definitions, and wording to ensure that a new bylaw is easier to read, understand and comply with.

75 per cent support

25 per cent ‘other’

83 per cent

(48/58 submitters)

20.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal:

·    should encourage better enforcement of the rules

·    addresses the health and safety risks of rental micromobility devices

·    supports the use of lay rules and wording.

21.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 19 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24.     The proposal impacts the operation of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Alcohol Licensing and Environmental Health Unit, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development), and Screen Auckland. These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

25.     The proposal may also impact the Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015. Auckland Transport is aware of the proposal. Auckland Transport has also made council aware of Auckland Transport’s review of its bylaw.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

26.     The proposed new bylaw impacts on local governance as it regulates trading, event and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example local parks.

27.     Local boards views were sought on a draft proposal in April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by eight local boards.

28.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda, page 191 (Attachment B to Item 12).

29.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30.     Māori have strong bonds to the land as kaitiaki. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places and facilitating opportunities for Māori business owners.

31.     The proposed rules for trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places apply to activities undertaken by Māori, particularly major or international events.

32.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

33.     Those submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three and Four which is consistent with the overall percentage of the Auckland-wide feedback. Comments included that the proposed regulation seems sensible and provides appropriate balance between mitigating risks and enabling businesses to operate. While the support for Proposal Two was split, submitters agreed that rental micromobility should remain regulated.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.    The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36.     On 20 October 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the new Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022’ diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report

197

b

Public feedback from people in the Albert-Eden Local Board area

243

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst

Sam Bunge - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/13222

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Auckland Council’s bylaw and associated controls about animals before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3.       The proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw and controls to better minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

4.       Council received responses from 189 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as following:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

Proposal 2

Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

Proposal 3

Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 October 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Horopaki

Context

The Animal Management Bylaw enables council to regulate the keeping of animals

8.       Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / the Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) and associated controls (controls) seek to minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places.

9.       The rules are enforced by the Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

10.     The Bylaw and controls are one part of a wider regulatory framework, including the:

·     Animal Products Act 1999 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 for animal welfare

·     Resource Management Act 1991 and Biosecurity Act 1993 to protect the environment

·     Dog Control Act 1996 and Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2019 for the care and control of dogs.

Council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

11.     On 27 May 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to improve the Bylaw and controls for public consultation (Item 11, GB/2021/50).

12.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw (see figure below).

13.     The proposal seeks to better regulate the keeping of animals by:

·     requiring an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

·     incorporating rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

·     updating the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

14.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 177 people and 12 organisations.

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

15.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

16.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

17.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·     indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·     recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area partly supports the proposal

18.     A total of ten people and one organisation from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback.

·      for Proposal One, there was split support for more rules about beekeeping (36 vs 36 per cent) from the local board area, similar to the overall feedback from all people who provided feedback

·      for Proposals Two and Three, there was majority support from the local board area, similar to the total support from all people who provided feedback.

 

 

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic

Local board area feedback

Auckland-wide feedback

1:        Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban premises with a land area of less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required).

27 per cent support

9 per cent opposed (want more rules)

36 per cent opposed (want less rules)

27 per cent ‘other’

0 per cent no response

34 per cent support

6 per cent oppose (want more rules)

48 per cent oppose (want less rules)

10 per cent ‘other’

2 per cent no response

2:        Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property.

73 per cent support

0 per cent opposed

9 per cent ‘other’

18 per cent no response

62 per cent support

15 per cent oppose

12 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

3:        Update the definitions, structure, format and wording of the Bylaw and controls.

73 per cent support

0 per cent opposed

9 per cent ‘other’

18 per cent no response

64 per cent support

10 per cent opposed

15 per cent ‘other’

11 per cent no response

 

19.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal should:

·     allow more hives that the currently proposed two

·     maintain current rules

·     introduce more restrictions on the ownership of bees.

20.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

21.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 29 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.     The proposal impacts council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance team who implement the Bylaw. The unit is aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

24.     The Bylaw is important to local boards as a topic of high community interest.

25.     Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in March and April 2021. The draft was supported in full by 13 local boards and with suggested changes by seven local boards. One local board opposed the proposal for public consultation.

26.     A summary of local board views and changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 11 May 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 11, page 101).

27.     This report provides an opportunity for local boards to provide views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw has significance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku.The proposal supports the key direction of kaitiakitanga in the Independent Māori Statutory Board Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by minimising the misuse of council-controlled public places.

29.     The proposed amended bylaw also supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by clarifying how the Bylaw applies to Māori and papakāinga. For example, the proposal clarifies that limits on the ownership of animals in urban areas do not apply to papakāinga within the Māori Purpose Zone of the Auckland Council Unitary Plan.

30.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

31.     The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback support Proposals Two and Three (consistent with the overall public feedback). The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback opposed Proposal One (consistent with the overall public feedback).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     The following risk has been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

 

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34.     On 29 October 2021 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report

263

b

Public feedback from people in the Albert-Eden Local Board area

291

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Saralee Gore - Policy Advisor

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2021/14044

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed amendments to the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback and provided a structure for deliberations.

3.       The proposal helps to protect the water and water networks from damage misuse and interference and assist in the provision of reliable, safe, and efficient water and wastewater services in Auckland.

4.       Council received responses from 46 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 16 July 2021. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic

Description

Proposal 1

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network

Proposal 2

To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

Proposal 3

Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws and other documentation

Other

Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters

 

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations, and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 5 November 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive public feedback on the proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 in this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

 

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw protects the water supply and wastewater networks

8.       The Governing Body adopted the Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) on 25 June 2015 (GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council Bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.

9.       This Bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:

·        requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity

·        ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control

·        protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants

·        managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage

·        allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water, in the event of drought or other emergency

·        managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.

10.     The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.

11.     In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the Bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.

Council proposed amendments to the Bylaw for public feedback

12.     On 25 February 2021, the Governing Body adopted a proposal make amendments to the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw for public consultation (GB/2021/11).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

14.     The proposal helps to clarify and further define the rules in the Bylaw by clarifying:

·        the rules around the unauthorised taking of water from the water supply network

·        the definitions around unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

·        linkages with other bylaws and documentation.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 June until 16 July 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 43 people and 3 organisations. In addition, the ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage received 396 hits.[5]

Process to amend Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

Graphical user interface, text, application, chat or text message

Description automatically generated

 

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

18.     The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·        indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·        recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the Albert-Eden local board area supports the proposal

19.     A total of four people from the Albert-Eden local board area provided feedback to the proposal. There was majority support for Proposals One, Two and Three, this is similar to the total support from all people across Auckland who provided feedback.

20.     Support of proposal in the local board area:

Topic

Total support from the Albert-Eden Local Board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:     To further define the rules regarding unauthorised taking of water from the network

50 per cent support

50 per cent other

70 per cent

2:     To further define the rules regarding unauthorised discharges to the wastewater network

100 per cent

79 per cent

3:     Clarification of linkages to other legislation, bylaws and documentation

25 per cent support

75 per cent other

76 per cent

 

21.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback.

·        Generally supportive of all amendments

·        When respondents chose other, they generally required more information to understand the proposal further.

·        1 respondent suggested council work with government to regulate producers of prohibited items.

22.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report which includes a summary of all public feedback. Attachment B contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

23.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 5 November 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24.     There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     The Bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

26.     Local board members were invited to give feedback on the Bylaw in December 2019. This included an offer by staff to present workshops to interested local boards at their meetings.

27.     Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to Bylaw, and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.

28.     This low interest in the Bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the Bylaw as low impact and low interest to local boards under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.

29.     An update on the findings and options stages were included in Watercare’s Local Board communications in June 2020.

30.     This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     The Bylaw contributes to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life "Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living") and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures "lntergenerational Reciprocity") by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.

32.     Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the bylaw scope such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.

33.     Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the Chair of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support of the direction taken and recommended a written update at the June forum to carry on the engagement.

34.     Watercare staff presented an update of the Bylaw review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in mid-October 2020.

35.     Those respondents who identified as Māori during the public consultation were all generally supportive of the three proposals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

We need to exercise caution with all financial decisions and ensure up-to-date financial advice.

Requirement for all council staff (does not apply to CCO staff)

For any report that have financial implications (including the spend of any money), you must seek input and advice from:

·    Commercial Managers for committee reports

·    Lead Financial Advisers for local board reports

 

Instructions

To author: You must add an internal note here that you have gained agreement from relevant Finance staff on the financial implications of your advice.

To authorisers: Please check that confirmation of agreement from relevant Finance staff is included.

To DA or GA: After compiling the agenda please delete all highlighted text before publishing.

36.     There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37.     The following risks have been identified:

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations

The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community

This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback

 

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     On 5 November 2021, the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in November 2021 (refer to the ‘Process to make the amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015’ diagram in Context).

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report

325

b

Public feedback from people in the Albert-Eden Local Board area

331

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sharon Danks – Operations Delivery Manager - Watercare

Authorisers

Mark Bourne – Chief Operations Officer - Watercare

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Parking Strategy Review

File No.: CP2021/14027

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy Review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Transport (AT) is currently reviewing its Parking Strategy (2015). The AT Parking Strategy sets out the objectives, principles and policies relating to AT’s management and supply of parking across Auckland.

3.       Since 2015, there have been numerous changes in the local government setting. These require realignment of policy.

4.       This report gives an overview of the approach being taken to the Parking Strategy review, including how staff are engaging with local boards.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the review of Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy by 30 September 2021, ahead of public consultation on the review.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The AT Parking Strategy was developed subsequent to local government amalgamation, bringing together one regional strategy and set of policies for all AT managed parking.[6]

6.       The current strategy was released in 2015 and is provided as Attachment A. The policies cover:

·    management of on-street and off-street parking

·    regulation methods (including pricing)

·    parking permits and coupons

·    comprehensive Parking Management Plans

·    parking for different types of transport

·    event management

·    technology for parking management

·    Park and Ride provision and pricing

·    compliance and enforcement.

7.       The Parking Strategy has worked well over the last seven years. It has led to various changes and successes such as:

·    business/centre parking areas implemented

·    residential parking schemes rolled out and expanded due to their success and popularity

·    demand-responsive, priced parking implemented successfully, helping to manage parking demand and keep parking spaces turning over and available for customers

·    a consistent approach applied across the region to parking issues, and a transparent approach.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The AT Parking Strategy needs to be reviewed

8.       Since the AT Parking Strategy was developed in 2015, there have been a number of changes to policy and planning, as well as changes in the Auckland setting. Examples include:

·      adoption of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Development signalled in the Unitary Plan will enable growth that may be difficult to service with public transport, meaning that some new suburbs will rely on car use for access

·      market demand is pushing for more housing provision and density. Development is already showing evidence of less car-parking provision and more issues with car-parking compliance

·      changes to travel behaviour, such as emergence of micro mobility (scooters etc) and the growth of the delivery economy

·      Auckland’s public transport network has matured over time, providing opportunities for further passenger uptake and efficiency related to park and ride management

·      Auckland’s Climate Plan (and coming government strategy) will require changes to the land transport system, including parking

·      of particular relevance is the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). This guides direction on urban development through district planning. The NPS-UD requires council to remove parking minimum requirements from the Unitary Plan. This means that developments will not be required to provide onsite parking. This will contribute to society and transport becoming less car-centric over time, however, it will lead to increasing pressure on public parking resources, particularly kerbside parking.

Developing a next-generation parking strategy

9.       The overall approach that AT is taking to the review is to:

·      realign the Parking Strategy objectives and outcomes with the central and local government policy and planning context

·      discover and understand key issues for parking through focussed discussions with elected representatives, subject matter experts, industry representatives, partners and stakeholders

·      fill any gaps with new policies (including those focus areas below)

·      re-engage with Aucklanders on parking

·      develop a strategy that is practical to implement.

10.     The review will also focus on three key areas where there is a known need for improvements and updates to policies and guidelines. These include:

·      Park and Ride - planning for growth and provision and managing demand

·      Kerbzone optimisation – developing a framework to manage the space between the kerbside lane and adjacent land uses

·      Comprehensive Parking Management Plans - these are parking management plans for more localised areas - we are reviewing the framework and guidelines to develop these.

What we are asking of local boards

11.     Parking roles and responsibilities provide an important context for understanding how parking is managed and how to have best effect in appealing or advocating for change.

12.     Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, AT is responsible for all parking within the road reserve. AT manages a number of off-street carparking sites on behalf of Council, by delegation. In addition, AT manages Park and Ride sites. Auckland Council owns all underlying land assets.

13.     AT has reviewed local board plans, which gives some insight into how parking issues impact each local board area. Common themes are the desire for more Park and Ride and bike parking, as well as managing parking as part of new developments.

14.     The recent Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) consultation also received feedback from local boards on the topic of enhancing Park and Ride facilities.

15.     AT welcomes further local board discussion and input to the Parking Strategy review. We are keen to hear from local boards, what outcomes we should be aiming for and also what specific issues the strategy should address.

16.     Local board feedback will enable us to shape the draft refresh of the Parking Strategy prior to public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17.     Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri:Auckland’s Climate Action will require changes to the land transport system, including parking.

18.     Government strategy and direction will also require changes, particularly the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) which requires planning decisions to contribute to the development of urban environments that support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and are resilient to the likely current and future effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     AT has engaged with key stakeholders and across the Auckland Council family, including with council’s Advisory Panels.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

·      June 2021- introductory memo to local boards to introduce the Parking Strategy review and approach.

·      June 2021- presentation to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum to introduce the Parking Strategy review and discuss plans for local board engagement.

·      August 2021- workshops with those local boards who elected to have a workshop before public consultation questions, raise ‘pain-points’ and gauge any initial feedback (PowerPoint provided as Attachment B).

·      September 2021 – opportunity to provide formal feedback ahead of public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     We are engaging with the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to establish how best to incorporate views from mana whenua and mataawaka into the review.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23.     There are no financial implications associated with the local board providing feedback on the review of Auckland Transport’s Parking Strategy.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24.     The direction taken by the updated Parking Strategy will include what levers should be pulled, how far they should be pulled, and how fast.

25.     Lower levels of intervention, undertaken more slowly, will allow more incremental change, and plenty of time for Aucklanders to adapt, but will take longer to achieve the shifts that Auckland needs.

26.     More intervention, implemented more quickly will require significant changes in behaviour but will be a quicker route to the eventual outcome of a city that is less dependent on cars.

27.     Each of these approaches will have their own risks and necessary mitigations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28.     Feedback from local boards ahead of public consultation is required by 30 September 2021.

29.     Public consultation will take place in October/November 2021. 

30.     Following consultation, all local boards will receive a summary of data and comments received during public consultation.

31.     Those local boards who elected to have their workshop after public consultation have these booked in for February 2022.

32.     Following these workshops, all local boards will have a further opportunity to provide formal feedback.

33.     The final updated Parking Strategy is expected to go to the Planning Committee for adoption in May 2022, after which local boards will be provided with a final copy of the strategy.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Auckland Transport Parking Strategy (2015)

349

b

Parking Strategy – PowerPoint presentation to local board workshops

389

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Local board feedback on the kerbside refuse charging mechanism policy

File No.: CP2021/14106

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal feedback from local boards on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Auckland Council is currently committed to expanding the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) funding model for kerbside refuse collection across the Auckland region. This reflects the policy within our Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 to provide consistent waste services across the region.

3.       This would involve moving the legacy Auckland City Council and Manukau City Council areas away from a rates-funded service to a PAYT funding model.

4.       Before we make this shift, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence to support the decision to move these areas to a PAYT model to assess whether PAYT is still the best solution for achieving the objectives of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

5.       Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·       all areas pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)

·       keeping a hybrid model (currently, 55 per cent of the region’s refuse collection is rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·       all areas rates-funded.

6.       The options will have a different impact on each local board area, depending on the current service charging mechanism relative to the proposed service change (Attachment A).

7.       A memo was circulated to all local boards on 23 July 2021 (Attachment B) outlining initial conclusions reached through the analysis of evidence gathered to date. This was used as a basis for discussion with local boards at workshops throughout August 2021 to understand their views on the risks and impacts of the potential options within their respective areas.

8.       This report seeks formal feedback from local boards, using the template in Attachment C as a guide, to inform the recommendation that staff will present to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the kerbside refuse charging model policy review.

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       The 2012 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) made provision to move all Auckland households towards a user-pays charging system for refuse collection, known in Auckland as pay-as-you-throw (PAYT). This transition to a consistent regional PAYT refuse service (weekly, changing to fortnightly over time) was confirmed in WMMP 2018.

10.     The decision was based on:

·       best evidence at the time that this was the most effective way to incentivise diversion from landfill and enable householders to reduce their waste costs

·       the understanding that technology would be available to enable pay-per-lift charging through radio-frequency identification (RFID) chipped bins.

11.     In legacy rates-funded areas, it was decided that the move to PAYT would take effect after the introduction of a food scraps collection service, to reduce the financial impact on households.

12.     Since then, more information has become available about the effectiveness of PAYT, particularly in the context of the other complementary services that the council has rolled out, for example regionwide recycling and the pilot food scraps service, due to be rolled out regionwide from early 2023. Prior to making the change to PAYT, Waste Solutions is reviewing the evidence base for this shift.

13.     In this review we are assessing several factors, including:

·       the potential effects of each funding model on communities

·       the potential waste minimisation impacts of each funding model

·       the expected cost to implement each funding model taking into account the changing financial circumstances of both ratepayers and council.

14.     To assist with this review, Waste Solutions commissioned independent consultants, Morrison Low, to examine the evidence currently available against the following aspects of the refuse collection service and its impact on the council, customers and the environment:

·   waste minimisation

·   cost effectiveness

·   reputation

·   technology

·   household responsibility / accountability

·   access / equity

·   downstream impacts on the collections industry

·   climate change

·   amenity

·   health and safety.

 

15.     Evidence gathered so far is being assessed against three options:

·       all areas PAYT

·       keeping a hybrid model (currently 55 per cent rates-funded, 45 per cent PAYT)

·       all areas rates-funded.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     Currently, 55 per cent of Auckland households (legacy Auckland City and Manukau City) are provided with a rates-funded refuse service, with the remaining 45 per cent (legacy Franklin, Waitākere, Papakura and North Shore City Council) on a PAYT service provided by either the council or a private operator. There is no council refuse collection service in legacy Rodney, but under current policy there is a commitment to provide a PAYT service in the future. See Attachment A for a breakdown of council refuse collection services by local board area.

17.     Detailed analysis and advice were provided to local boards in a memo dated 23 July 2021 (Attachment B).  This memo was marked confidential, but the need for confidentiality has now lapsed.

 

 

 

Conclusions on key issues

18.     Aotearoa/New Zealand is unique in having side-by-side competition between private and council services in the residential refuse collection market. This impacts the way PAYT operates and introduces a number of challenges not experienced overseas.

19.     Financial modelling currently indicates that PAYT is less cost-effective for the council than rates-funded solutions because of more complex systems, duplication of workloads by multiple suppliers and the council’s need to offer the service to properties across the entire region.

20.     Evidence from overseas found only a very weak link between marginal pricing changes and change in refuse quantities. This is consistent with a 2021 examination of refuse tonnages, which found no clear evidence that PAYT areas of Auckland produce less refuse per capita than rates-funded areas.

21.     The current price in Auckland does not appear to be a sufficient economic driver to motivate behaviour change in households.

22.     International evidence indicates the greatest waste minimisation is achieved through providing easy access to services that divert waste away from landfill (such as the recycling and food scraps collection services), good community education programmes, and reduced access to refuse volume to encourage use of the diversion services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     Enhancing access to diversion and resource recovery, along with optimising efficiencies around collecting refuse at the kerbside, presents opportunities to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions directly, for example through the reduction of vehicle movements and diversion of organic material from landfill, and indirectly by encouraging better resource use.

24.     Therefore, considerations to take into account when assessing options include the opportunities to minimise both direct and immediate impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, for example: 

·       emissions can be mitigated where the council retains greater control over household behaviour and container size (larger customer base), to drive higher participation rates from households in the weekly food scraps service which is critical to reducing methane emissions from landfill

·       emissions can be mitigated by choosing the option that will bring efficiencies to vehicle servicing routes. This includes reducing duplication of refuse collectors operating side-by-side in the same areas of Auckland.

25.     The rates-funded option provides the opportunity to reduce total truck kilometres travelled from a sole supplier, the ability to specify the truck requirement through the procurement process and efficiencies in route design.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     This review is about the way in which council charges for domestic kerbside rubbish collections and so views have not been sought from the wider council family.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

27.     Local boards provided feedback through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 development process. All local boards supported the proposed WMMP. Only Devonport-Takapuna, Manurewa, Ōrākei and Papakura Local Boards expressed views on refuse charging mechanisms within their responses.

28.     Staff provided a detailed memo to all local boards on 23 July 2021, outlining the early findings of the review, acknowledging that detailed works on costs and equity were still being completed.

29.     Staff attended workshops with local boards between 29 July and 24 August 2021 to present on the key points of the review and seek views on the current refuse collection services. Informal feedback was noted during these workshops.

30.     This report seeks formal feedback from the local board using the template provided in Attachment C to inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     Mana whenua and mataawaka were engaged in the development of the 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and identified priority actions for Māori.

32.     The council partners with Para Kore ki Tāmaki – a Māori-developed and implemented programme that integrates mātauranga Māori and zero waste principles and practices to support marae, Māori organisations, Kura Kaupapa Māori and Kōhanga Reo to divert significant quantities of recycling and organic waste from landfill.

33.     Staff outlined the purpose of the review and early findings to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Regional Hui on 9 July 2021 and then at a Regional Projects Workshop on 20 July 2021. Members of the forum receiving the presentation raised concerns that poorer communities had fewer choices in relation to controlling their waste production. Staff acknowledged that this was recognised by Waste Solutions and that multiple approaches are needed, including advocacy to central government on phasing out hard-to-recycle plastics and the introduction of product stewardship schemes.

34.     Staff are also working with specialist community facilitators Rākau Tautoko and Waste Solutions community partners to hold targeted focus groups with Māori and Pacific communities during August and September 2021 to seek their views on different refuse collection payment mechanisms. These views will inform the recommendation to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35.     In terms of cost-effectiveness, when comparing rates funded with PAYT models, the Morrison Low study concluded that the rates-funded option provides greater cost-effectiveness for the council than both the current hybrid model and the PAYT option due to economies of scale.

36.     This was based on:

·       cost: results of financial modelling commissioned by the council, using existing parameters and the weekly PAYT service, show that the cost of delivering a rates-funded service is similar, but costs the community significantly less overall when all service costs, including private collection costs, are included.

·       cost sustainability: an estimated variation in cost per pickup based on the number of customers serviced by Auckland Council which shows that the cost of operating the council service increases sharply when the council is servicing less than 30 per cent of the community. At 30 per cent, it is approximately double the cost per pickup compared to 80 per cent.

37.     Further analysis of costs is being carried out by council staff as part of this discovery phase.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     High level risks are outlined in Table 1. More detailed risks and mitigations will be examined as part of the development of options for Environment and Climate Change Committee throughout September.

Table 1: Kerbside refuse charging policy review high level risks and mitigations

Risk

Mitigation

The perception of unfairness in offering the same service/charge to all households: households that produce large amounts of waste are favoured under the rates-funded model, whereas households that produce less waste are favoured under the PAYT model.

Staff are investigating the cost of offering three different bin sizes (80l/120l/240l) under the rates-funded model to accommodate different households’ needs.

There is no agreement on which charging model works best for the whole of Auckland

Consideration of a hybrid model will be presented as part of the options analysis to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021. 

The preferred option costs council more to deliver than the current hybrid option.

Detailed costs will be provided for all three options. These will be presented at workshops with elected members and local board chairs as part of the Annual Budget 2022/23 process. This will include analysis of the cost to the community and an estimate of the cost of failing to meet Auckland’s climate change goals.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39.     Staff are currently engaging with elected members, local boards, industry and community groups, prior to developing options and recommendations to take to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for a decision on 14 October 2021.

40.     Local board feedback received by 28 September will help inform the recommendation and will be included within the report.

41.     In addition to the above, the following studies are currently underway, or have recently concluded: 

·       radio-frequency identification (RFID) trial to show whether this service will be able to be operated at scale, with a sufficiently low error rate to be considered feasible in Auckland

·       detailed analysis of costs of all options

·       investigation of the social impacts of the three options.

42.     The results of these studies will conclude the desk-based discovery phase and will inform the final evaluation of options by Morrison Low. This final report will help to inform the recommendation that will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 14 October 2021.

43.     If the Environment and Climate Change Committee decide to deviate from current Waste Management and Minimisation Plan policy by approving either the rates-funded or hybrid model option, the current proposal is to engage more widely on options through a special consultative procedure as part of the Annual Plan 2022/2023 process.

44.     Local boards will be consulted on the preferred option, which will include a more detailed analysis of the timings of any changes to service, during that process.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Current refuse services and impact of options by local board area

411

b

Memo Kerbside Refuse Charging Review

413

c

Template for local board feedback – refuse charging

421

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sarah Le Claire - Waste Planning Manager

Authorisers

Parul Sood - Manager Waste Planning

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator



Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on the government's Three Waters reform proposal

File No.: CP2021/13331

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Albert-Eden Local Board’s formal feedback on the government's Three Waters reform proposal.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       For the past four years, the government has been exploring the challenges and opportunities facing the three waters system. They are seeking to address a complex set of issues relating to the regulation, funding, financing, and provision of drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater services (the three waters) and to deliver better outcomes for New Zealand’s people, environment and economy.

3.       The reform proposes a comprehensive, system-wide change that aims to improve the safety, quality and environmental performance of three water services. The government is proposing to establish four publicly-owned entities to take responsibility for drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure across New Zealand.

4.       In June, the government released its case for change, the key design features of a new water services system (including the number of entities, boundaries, the regulatory environment and governance arrangements) and information and analysis specific to individual councils.

5.       Information on the Three Waters reform proposal can be found here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-Waters-Reform-Programme.

6.       Local boards were invited to provide feedback to be incorporated and appended to the Auckland Council feedback by 10 September 2021. As this deadline fell before the next scheduled business meeting formal feedback was provided utilising the urgent decision-making process.

7.       Local boards were invited to provide feedback on the following points:

·   need for three waters reform in New Zealand

·   proposed entity A (Auckland and Northland)

·   proposed governance and representation arrangements

·   integration of land-use/growth planning and water services

·   environmental and/or economic regulation.

8.       The local board’s feedback was provided to Auckland Council subject matter experts prior to the deadline. A copy of the urgent decision, including the local board’s feedback, is attached to this report (Attachment A).

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      note the formal feedback on the government’s Three Waters Reform proposal (Attachment A) as authorised through the urgent decision-making process.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on the Three Waters reform proposal - via urgent decision

425

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Emma Reed - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes

File No.: CP2021/13324

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Albert-Eden Local Board’s formal feedback on the Department of Internal Affairs’ consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Department of Internal Affairs’ consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes was open for public submission with a closing date of 27 August 2021.

3.       In 2020 the government began a two-stage process to align Māori ward and Māori general ward processes more closely together.

4.       The first stage of the changes was completed on 1 March 2021 with the enactment of the Local Electoral (Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Act 2021. These changes were to:

·   remove all mechanisms from the Local Electoral Act 2001 for binding polls to be held on the establishment of Māori wards

·   provide councils with a fresh opportunity to make decisions on Māori wards in time for the 2022 local elections.

5.       The second stage of changes is intended by the Minister to provide an enduring process for councils to consider setting up Māori wards, by bringing even closer together the Māori wards process and general wards process.

6.       The government has identified six key differences between the Māori wards and general wards process that are the focus of their consultation. Those differences are:

·   The requirements for councils to consider ward systems

·   The timing of decisions

·   Opportunities for public input

·   Decision-making rights and the role of the Local Government Commission

·   How and when wards can be discontinued

·   The types of polls that councils can hold.

7.       Further information and summary documents on the consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes can be found here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/maori-wards

8.       Local boards were invited to provide feedback to be incorporated and appended to the Auckland Council submission by 25 August 2021. As this deadline fell before the next scheduled business meeting formal feedback was provided utilising the delegation to the Chair (AE/2020/39).

9.       The local board’s feedback was provided to Auckland Council subject matter experts prior to the deadline. A copy of the local board’s feedback is included as an attachment to this report (Attachment A).

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      note the formal feedback on the Department of Internal Affairs’ consultation on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes (Attachment A) as authorised by delegation to the Chair (resolution number AE/2020/39).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Albert-Eden Local Board feedback on changes to Māori ward and Māori constituency processes

449

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Emma Reed - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors' Updates

File No.: CP2020/17584

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors to update the local board on Governing Body issues they have been involved with since the previous local board meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Standing Orders 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 provides provision in the local board meeting for Governing Body members to update their local board counterparts on regional matters of interest to the local board.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillors Christine Fletcher and Cathy Casey’s verbal updates.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2021/14109

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To facilitate an opportunity for the local board chairperson to provide a written update on projects, meetings and other initiatives relevant to the local board’s interests.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 2.4.7, the chairperson will update board members by way of a written report.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive Chairperson Corrick’s September 2021 report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Chairperson Corrick - September 2021 Report

455

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authorises

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Board Members' Reports

File No.: CP2021/14110

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To facilitate an opportunity for local board members to provide a written update on projects and events-attended since the previous month’s meeting and to discuss other matters of interest to the board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This is an information item and it is optional for board members to provide a written board member report for inclusion in the agenda.

3.       Local board members are recommended to use a Notice of Motion, rather than a Board Member Report, should a member wish to propose a recommendation or request action to be undertaken by staff.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the Board Member Reports for September 2021.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Member Robertson - September 2021 Board Report

459

b

Deputy Chairperson Watson - September 2021 Board Report

463

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 2021 Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2021/14117

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Albert-Eden Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar, which is a schedule of items that are expected to be reported to the local board during business meetings and/or workshops for 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report contains the governance forward work calendar, a schedule of items that will come before the Albert-Eden Local Board during business meetings and/or workshops for 2021. The local board’s governance forward work calendar is appended to this report under Attachment A.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

· ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

· clarifying what advice is required and when

· clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be reported to the local board’s monthly business meetings and distributed to relevant council staff.  At times there may be items that will arise that are not programmed or noted in the governance calendar.  Local board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      note the September 2021 edition of the Albert-Eden Local Board 2021 Governance Forward Work Calendar.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Albert-Eden Local Board 2021 Governance Forward Work Calendar - September edition

469

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Records

File No.: CP2021/14231

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the local board to receive the records of its recent workshops held following the previous month’s local board business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 12.1.4, the local board shall receive a record of the general proceedings of each of its workshops held since the previous month’s local board business meeting.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a)      receive the Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Records for the workshops held on the 24 and 31 August and 1, 7, 8, 14 and 15 September 2021.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 24 August 2021

473

b

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 31 August 2021

475

c

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 1 September 2021

477

d

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 7 September 2021

479

e

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 8 September 2021

481

f

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 14 September 2021

483

g

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record - 15 September 2021

485

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Albert-Eden Local Board

21 September 2021

 

 

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

That the Albert-Eden Local Board

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       Albert-Eden Local Board feedback to the Establishment Unit Board of the City Centre to Māngere Light Rail Project

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)(c)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to damage the public interest.

In particular, 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.

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] Statistics New Zealand, 22.9% (163,161) estimated in 2017

[2] Ministry of Social Development. Briefing to the Incoming Ministers, October 2014, p.31. 

[3] A systems analysis conducted by Auckland Council’s Innovation Unit.

[4]     ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 54 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 134 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 337 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[5] ‘AK Have Your Say’ webpage ’hits’ comprised of 43 ‘engaged’ participants (people who completed the online survey), 88 ‘informed’ participants (people who downloaded a document, visited a FAQ page or multiple project pages, or completed the survey) and 265 ‘aware’ participants (people who visited at least one page).

[6] Management of Council parking is not covered by the 2015 Parking Strategy, unless Council has specifically delegated management to AT.