I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Puketapapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Thursday, 13 August 2015 1:00pm Kotare-Tauhou Room, Wesley Community Centre 740 Sandringham Rd Extn Mt Roskill |
Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Michael Wood |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
|
|
Members |
Julie Fairey |
|
|
David Holm |
|
|
Nigel Turnbull |
|
(Quorum 2 members)
|
|
Brenda Railey Democracy Advisor
4 August 2015
Contact Telephone: 021 820 781 Email: brenda.railey@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel 13 August 2015 |
|
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Confirmation of Minutes 5
5 Leave of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 5
9 Public Forum 5
10 Extraordinary Business 5
11 Notices of Motion 6
12 Election of Deputy Chairperson 7
13 Hearing and deliberation report - Proposed changes to local dog access rules in the Puketāpapa Local Board Area 9
14 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
1 Welcome
Chairperson Michael Wood will deliver the welcome message.
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
There are no minutes to confirm.
5 Leave of Absence
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
7 Petitions
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
8 Deputations
Standing Order 3.20 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 Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel. 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
At the close of the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel 13 August 2015 |
|
Election of Deputy Chairperson
File No.: CP2015/15816
Purpose
1. In accordance with Schedule 7, clause 21(5)(b) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Relationship Manager, Local Board Services on behalf of the Chief Executive, will call for nominations for the Deputy Chairperson of the Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel.
2. Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel must elect a member to the Deputy Chairperson position in accordance with Schedule 7, clause 25 of the Act, noting that no member has a casting vote.
That the Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel elects a deputy chairperson for the duration of the Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel. |
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
Authors |
Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Karen Lyons - Manager Local Board Services Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel 13 August 2015 |
|
Hearing and deliberation report - Proposed changes to local dog access rules in the Puketāpapa Local Board Area
File No.: CP2015/15159
Purpose
1. To support the hearing panel with the hearing and deliberation process on the proposed changes to local dog access rules in the Puketāpapa Local Board.
Executive Summary
2. The Puketāpapa Local Board at its business meeting on 30 April 2015 adopted for public consultation proposed changes to local dog access rules on changes with Monte Cecilia Park.
3. The public consultation submission period opened on 12 June and closed on 17 July 2015. A total of 33 submissions were received and a total of 5 submitters indicated they wished to be heard.
4. The Puketāpapa Local Board appointed a hearing panel (members Wood (as chair), Holm, Turnbull and Fairey) to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the local board (resolution number PKTPP/2015/65).
5. This report summarises the matters raised in submissions and provides staff comments where appropriate to support the panel during the hearing and deliberation process.
6. The hearing panel will first hear from submitters who wish to be heard in support of their submission, and then deliberate on the matters raised in the submissions received. To conclude the process, the hearing panel will adopt a decision report detailing the panel’s recommendations to the Local Board for amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.
That the Puketāpapa Local Board Dog Access Review Panel: [Author note: The following resolutions are to be considered on the first day of hearings prior to the hearing of the first oral submitter] a) in relation to the proposed changes to local dog access rules contained in the document titled ‘Amendments to Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 – Puketāpapa Local Board May 2015’: i) receive this hearing and deliberation report ii) receive the submissions iii) receive any late submissions iv) hear the submitters who wish to be heard in support of their submission Author note: The following resolutions are to be considered to conclude the deliberations b) adopt the decision report titled ‘Hearing panel decision report on local dog access rules in the Puketāpapa Local Board area 2015’. Author note: The hearing panel decision report is prepared as part of the deliberation process. |
Background
Proposal
7. The Puketāpapa Local Board at its business meeting on 30 April 2015 adopted for public consultation proposed changes to allow dogs under control off-leash in the naturally formed bowl of Monte Cecilia Park. The full statement of proposal is contained in Attachment A.
Submission process
8. The public consultation submission period opened on 12 June and closed on 17 July 2015.
9. The proposed changes were notified in a variety of ways, including:
· notices to all registered dog owners with their dog registration reminder letter
· a public notice in the New Zealand Herald on 12 June 2015
· on the Auckland Council website
· in the June People’s Panel e-update
· to local board registered stakeholders
· notices to previous submitters on dog access in affected local board areas
10. All relevant documents were made available on council’s website and through local libraries and service centres.
11. A total of 33 submissions were received.
Hearing and deliberations process
12. The Puketāpapa Local Board appointed a hearing panel (members Wood (as chair), Holm, Turnbull and Fairey) to receive, hear and deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the local board (resolution number PKTPP/2015/65).
13. A total of five submitters have indicated they wish to be heard. Copies of all submissions received are attached to the agenda.
14. Hearings provide an opportunity for submitters to speak in support of their submission and for members of the hearing panel to ask questions to better understand the views of submitters.
15. In conducting hearings and making decisions, the hearing panel must consider:
· the need to meet a range of statutory, policy and delegated authority decision-making requirements summarised in Attachment B, including the need to:
o ensure decisions provide for public safety and comfort, protection of wildlife and habitat and the needs of dogs and their owners
o consider the region-wide standard summer beach times and season
o ensure dog access rules are easy to understand ‘on the ground’.
· the weight the hearing panel puts on the matters raised by the submitters
· information used to develop and contained in the statement of proposal
· other information received by the hearing panel, such as this report.
16. At the conclusion of the hearings, the panel will deliberate and confirm by way of resolution its recommendations to the local board in a decision report. The local board will decided whether or not to accept the panel’s recommendations. The report is currently scheduled to be presented to the local board at the 27 August 2015 business meeting.
Submissions
17. The submission form asked submitters which parts of the proposal they agreed and/or disagreed with and to provide further comments if they wished. The majority of submitters provided responses in this manner.
18. Matters raised in submissions have been summarised into the topics as presented in the statement of proposal.
19. Issues raised that are outside of the scope of the proposal are addressed in Submission topic 2 (page 5).
20. For each topic, staff comments and other information is provided where appropriate.
Submission topic 1 – Monte Celia Park
21. The Puketāpapa Local Board is proposing to allow dogs under control off-leash in the naturally formed bowl of Monte Cecilia Park. Dogs would continue to be allowed under control on-leash in the remainder of the park.
22. A total number of 43 submission points were received that relate to the topic. Twenty-two submission points supported the creation of the under control off a leash area within the naturaly formed bowl with five submission submision points in oposition. Seven submision points supported the retention of the under control on a leash rule outside of the bowl area with seven submission points seeking the area to either be under control off a leash or an extension of the under control off a leash area.
23. The table below provides an overview of the issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 1: Monte Cecilia Park
Decision sought and reason |
Breakdown* |
Area within the natural bowl area |
|
Support proposal as publicly notified - Allow dogs to be under control off a leash at all times within the natural bowl area |
Local dog owner: 13 Visiting dog owner: 6 Local non-dog owner: 1 Visiting non-dog owner: 2 |
· Appropriate area away from children’s playground · Dogs need adequate exercise opportunities · Provides a balance between dog owners and non-dog owners · Park under utilised · Supports responsible dog owners |
|
Allow dogs to be under control on a leash at all times |
Local: 4 |
· I don’t want dogs to come up to me when I am at a beach or park |
|
Prohibit dogs at all times |
Local: 1 |
· Owners don't try or are unable to control their dogs · Dogs frighten or attack children |
|
Area outside the natural bowl area |
|
Support proposal as publicly notified - Allow dogs to be under control on a leash at all times outside of the natural bowl area |
Local dog owner: 5 Visiting dog owner: 1 Local non-dog owner: 1 |
· I don’t want dogs to come up to me when I am at a beach or parks · Owners don't try or are unable to control their dogs · Wildlife · Park under utilised |
|
Prohibit dogs at all times |
Local: 1 |
· Owners don't try or are unable to control their dogs · Dogs frighten or attack children |
|
Adopt following time and season daytime hours: Before 8am under control off leash. |
Local: 1 |
· Dogs need adequate exercise opportunities · Provides a balance between dog owners and non-dog owners · Integrates dog owners into the whole park |
|
Adopt following time and season daytime hours: After 7pm under control off leash |
Local: 1 |
· No children or elderly at this time |
|
Extend under control off leash area |
Local dog owner: 1 Visiting dog owner: 1 |
· Owners generally keep their dogs well under control · Park under utilised |
|
Allow dogs under control off a leash at all times |
Dog owner: 3 |
· Support responsible dog owners |
* Whether a submitter is identified as a dog owner and living in the Puketāpapa Local Board Area (or not) is determined by information provided on submission forms, including local board area, suburb and post code.
Staff comments
24. As part of its deliberations, the hearing panel may wish to consider the following.
25. The results from an online survey undertaken in March 2015[1] in relation to this topic provides another perspective of community views:
· 118 residents and visitors responded to the on-line survey, of which 74 percent were dog owners and 26 percent were non-dog owners
· Dog owners favoured under control off-leash dog access within the whole of Monte Cecilia Park
· Local non-dog owners favoured under control on-leash dog access within the whole of Monte Cecilia Park
Submission topic 2 - Other matters
26. The matters within the decision-making scope of the hearing panel are limited to the matters contained in the proposal (Attachment A).
27. Matters raised by submitters outside this scope are included in this section for completeness. Should the hearing panel wish to consider any of these matters an additional (and separate) process is required.
28. The table below provides an overview of the issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 2: Other maters
Decision sought and reason |
Breakdown* |
Other parks - Big King |
|
Allow dogs under control off a leash at all times |
Local dog owner: 1 |
· Support responsible dog owners |
|
Compliance and enforcement |
|
Council should provide more patrols |
Visiting dog owner: 1 |
· Owners don't try or are unable to control their dogs |
|
Dog Parks |
|
Provide more 'dog parks' |
Visiting non-dog owner: 1 |
· I avoid visiting beaches or parks if there are likely to be dogs there |
|
Facilities |
|
Provide more lighting in the pathways |
Local: 1 |
Provide amenities (e.g. dog bins and bags) |
Local: 1 |
Provide cafe seating for dog owners, such as loops set in the ground |
Local: 1 |
Education |
|
Provide education to non-dog owner |
Local dog owner: 1 |
· Support responsible dog owners |
* Whether a submitter is identified as a dog owner and living in the Puketāpapa Local Board Area (or not) is determined by information provided on submission forms, including local board area, suburb and post code.
Staff comments
29. In relation to other matters:
· Te Tatua a Riukiuta (Big King) is currently an under control off a leash area. Dog access rules on Te Tatua a Riukiuta (Big King) are determined by the governing body of Auckland Council (not the local board)
· the provision of facilities such as dog parks, lighting, amenities and seating is a matter for the local board as part of its management of local parks
· council’s Licencing and Compliance Services provides enforcement and education services.
No. |
Title |
Page |
aView |
Statement of Proposal - Puketapapa (Monte Cecilia Park) |
15 |
bView |
Decision-making framework and considerations |
25 |
C |
Submissions Received (Under Separate Cover) |
|
Signatories
Authors |
Justin Walters - Policy Analyst Shireen Munday - Policy Analyst |
Authorisers |
Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws Victoria Villaraza - Relationship Manager |
[1] Further details on the survey are provided in the Statement of Proposal as attached to this report.