|
Waitematā
Local Board Hearings Committee
12 August 2015
|
|
Hearings and
Deliberation Report - Proposed Changes to the Dog Access Rules for the
Waitemata Local Board Area
File No.: CP2015/15192
Purpose
1. To support the
Hearings Committee with the hearing and deliberation process on the proposed
changes to local dog access rules in the Waitemata Local Board.
Executive
summary
2. The Waitemata
Local Board at its business meeting on 12 May 2015 adopted for public consultation proposed changes to local dog access
rules for beach and foreshore areas and selected parks.
3. The public
consultation submission period opened on 12 June and closed on 17 July 2015. A
total of 75 submissions were received and a total of 13 submitters indicated
they wished to be heard.
4. The Waitemata
Local Board delegated to Waitemata Local Board Hearings Committee, with the
addition of the Board Chair, Shale Chambers to hear and
deliberate on submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes
to the Board.
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 Hearings
Committee 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 Hearings Committee will adopt a decision
report detailing the panel’s recommendations to the local board for amendments
to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012.
|
Recommendations
[Author note: The following resolutions are to
be considered on the first day of hearings prior to the hearing of the first
oral submitter]
That the Waitematā Local
Board Hearings Committee:
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 – Waitemata 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
That the Waitematā Local
Board Hearings Committee:
b) Adopt the
decision report titled ‘Hearing panel decision report on local dog access
rules in the Waitemata local board area 2015’.
Author note: The Hearings Committee decision
report is prepared during the deliberation process.
|
Proposal
7. The
Waitemata Local Board at its business meeting on 12 May
2015, adopted for public consultation a proposal on
changes to local dog access rules on the beach and foreshore and selected parks
as follows (resolution number WTM/2015/16):
· apply an under
control off leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to
the western headland of Marine Parade Beach
· apply an amended
time and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran
Street and Judges Bay as follows:
|
Summer
(Labour Weekend until 31 March)
|
|
10am to 7pm
|
Before 10am and after 7pm
|
|
Sand and Water
Prohibited
|
Sand and Water
Under control on a leash
|
|
Winter (1
April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
|
|
10am to 4pm
|
Before 10am and after 4pm
|
|
Sand and Water
Under control on a leash
|
Sand and Water
Under control off a leash
|
· apply an under
control on leash rule to all areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay
· replace the general
wildlife rule with specific rules on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore to
prohibit dogs north of Meola Reef and on-leash east of Meola Reef to Garnet
Road
· align the summer
season period for parks with the beach summer season period
· amend the current
under control off-leash rule for Coxs Bay Reserve (except north of the stream
adjacent to West End Road), Seddon Fields and Victoria Park to under control
on-leash
· enlarge the
northern under control off-leash area on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway
running from Dryden Street to Arnold Street
· reclassify Meola
Reef within the fenced area as a designated dog exercise area
· reclassify all
other dog exercise areas as under control off-leash areas
· remove the general
rules for picnic and fitness areas.
8. The proposed changes are
summarised on page 4 of the ‘Statement of Proposal - Amendments to Auckland
Council Policy on Dogs 2012 – Waitemata Local Board’ contained in Attachment A.
Submission process
9. The public consultation submission
period opened on 12 June and closed on 17 July 2015.
10. The proposed changes were notified
as follows:
· notices to all registered dog owners with their
dog registration reminder letter
· a public notice in the New Zealand Herald
on 12 June 2015
· in the June local editions of Our Auckland
· on the Auckland Council website
· in the June People’s Panel e-update
· through local social media and print media[1]
· to local board registered stakeholders[2]
· notices to previous submitters on dog
access in affected local board areas
11. All relevant documents were made
available on council’s website and through local libraries and service centres.
12. A total of 75 submissions were received.
Hearing and deliberations process
13. The Waitemata Local Board appointed
the Waitemata Local Board
Hearings Committee, with the addition of the Board Chair, Shale Chambers, to receive, hear and deliberate on
submissions and other relevant information and recommend changes to the local
board (resolution number WTM/2015/16).
14. A total of thirteen submitters have
indicated they wish to be heard. Copies of all submissions received are
attached to the agenda.
15. Hearings provide an opportunity for
submitters to speak in support of their submission and for members of the
Hearings Committee to ask questions to better understand the views of
submitters.
16. In conducting hearings and making
decisions, the Hearings Committee 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 Committee puts on
the matters raised by the submitters
· information used to develop and contained
in the statement of proposal
· other information received by the Hearings
Committee, such as this report.
17. At the conclusion of the hearings,
the Committee will deliberate and confirm its recommendations to the local
board in a decision report. The local board will decide whether or not to
accept the Hearing Committee’s recommendations. The report is currently
scheduled to be presented to the local board at the 08 September 2015 business
meeting.
Submissions
18. 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.
19. Matters raised in submissions have
been summarised in this report into the topics as presented in the statement of
proposal.
20. The submissions are analysed by
submission points rather than individual submissions.
21. Of the submissions there were two
submission points supporting the proposal in general and nine opposing the
proposal as notified in general.
22. In some instances the feedback from
submitters related to dog access rules in general, rather than referring to any
of the specific topics of the proposal. This general commentary is summarised
in submission topic 6.
23. Issues raised that are outside of
the scope of the proposal are addressed in submission topic 7.
24. For each topic, staff comments and
other information is provided where appropriate.
Submission
topic 1 – Beaches and foreshore
25. The
proposed changes for the beach and foreshore area within the statement of
proposal are as follows:
· apply an under control
off a leash rule west of Meola Reef Reserve and east of Garnet Road up to the
western headland of Marine Parade Beach
· apply an amended time
and season rule from the western headland of Marine Parade Beach to Curran
Street and Judges Bay as follows:
|
Summer
(Labour Weekend until 31 March)
|
|
10am to 7pm
|
Before 10am and after 7pm
|
|
Sand and Water
Prohibited
|
Sand and Water
Under control on a leash
|
|
Winter (1
April until Friday before Labour Weekend)
|
|
10am to 4pm
|
Before 10am and after 4pm
|
|
Sand and Water
Under control on a leash
|
Sand and Water
Under control off a leash
|
· apply an under control
on a leash rule to all areas east of Curran Street, excluding Judges Bay
26. A total of 29 submission points
were made regarding the beach and foreshore provisions. The submission points
have a wide spread of views from more restrictive to less restricted dog access
rules for the beach and foreshore areas.
27. The table below provides an
overview of the issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 1: Beach and foreshore
|
Decision sought
|
Reasons
|
Submission Points
|
|
General
|
|
Support proposal as publicly notified
|
· More areas
are available to dog owners in the winter and after 7pm in summer
· Distinction
between summer and winter rules work well to allow more dog access during
winter
|
3
|
|
Oppose the proposal as notified
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Dogs help
with owners health and fitness
|
2
|
|
Allow dogs under control off a leash at
all times
|
· People
should be taught how to deal with dogs
· Dogs are a
positive for people
· Support
responsible dog owners
|
1
|
|
Provide more under control off a leash dog
access
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Allow dog access at all times
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Require dogs to be prohibited at all
times
|
|
1
|
|
Adopt following time and season rule:
Core daytime hours - Under control on a leash
|
· Owners are
required to keep their dogs under control and there is no difference between
having dogs under control on a leash on the road or the beach
|
1
|
|
Time and season -
Summer season period
|
|
Adopt region wide
standard - Labour Weekend to 1st March
|
· Reduce
confusion
· Beach is
quiet
|
5
|
|
Adopt daylight
savings
|
|
1
|
|
Adopt December to
March
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
2
|
|
Time and season -
Summer
|
|
Adopt following time
and season daytime hours: Before 10am - Under control off a leash
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Adopt following time
and season daytime hours: After 4pm - Under control on-leash
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Adopt following time
and season daytime hours: After 7pm - Under control off a leash
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities and socialisation
|
2
|
|
Adopt following time
and season daytime hours: in summer :
Weekend and Statutory
Holidays - Under control off-leash before 11am and after 5pm.
Other times - Under control off-leash
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Adopt following time
and season daytime hours: in summer :
Weekend and Statutory
Holidays - Under control off-leash before 11am and after 5pm.
Other times - Under control off-leash before 12pm and after 4pm.
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Time and season -
Winter
|
|
Allow under control
off-leash at all times
|
· Insufficient
evidence to support proposal
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Not used
by others at the time
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
· Socialisation of people and dogs important
|
4
|
|
Judges Bay
|
|
Allow dogs to be
under control on a leash at all times
|
· Beach/Park is too busy
· Owners don't try or are unable to control
their dogs
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
Staff
comments
28. As part of the
on-line survey undertaken during the pre-consultation, 375 respondents (60 per
cent non-dog owners and 40 per cent dog owners) commented as follows:
· local non-dog owners preferred the summer time and
season rules to be aligned with daylight savings (39 per cent) with 20 per cent
preferring Labour Weekend
· local dog owners preferred a later start to the summer
season rules with the summer season starting on the 1 December (46 per cent)
and end at the beginning of April which is similar to the end of daylight
savings
· local non-dog owners generally do not want unknown
dogs approaching them while at the beach (47 per cent) with 18 per cent being
nervous around dogs and 19 per cent stating that they avoid beaches if there
are likely to be dogs there
· local dog owners generally do not mind being
approached by dogs (71 per cent), this drops to 38 per cent for non-dog owners
· 39 per cent of local dog owners like being approached
by dogs while only 15 per cent for non-dog owners like being approached by
dogs.
· The table below shows
a summary of the preferred dog access rules for the respondents to the online
survey from the Waitematā
Local Board area.
|
Dog owners
|
Non-dog owners
|
|
Summer
|
Summer
|
|
10am
to 6pm
|
Before
10am and after 6pm
|
10am
to 7pm
|
Before
10am and after 7pm
|
|
Under
control on a leash
|
Under
control off a leash
|
Prohibited
|
Under
control on a leash
|
|
Winter
|
Winter
|
|
10am
to 4pm
|
Before
10am and after 4pm
|
10am
to 4pm
|
Before
10am and after 4pm
|
|
Under control off a leash
|
Under control off a leash
|
Under
control on a leash
|
Under
control on a leash
|
29. As part of the survey of children at a children’s event at Silo Park
undertaken during the pre-consultation:
· 79 per cent of respondents either liked or did not
mind dog on beaches and parks while 18 per cent didn’t like it or were nervous
· just over half of the respondents had had an issue
with a dog in the past.
Submission topic 2 –
Protected wildlife areas
30. The proposal is to replace the current general
wildlife rule with a specific rule on the Meola Reef Reserve foreshore.
31. Only one submission point was made that
specifically related to the protected wildlife provisions and was in support of
the preferred option.
Submission topic 3 – Parks
32. The proposal as
it related to parks was as follows:
· to align the summer season period for parks with the
beach summer season period
· to replace the existing time and season rule providing
under control off a leash access in the morning and evening on Cox’s Bay
Reserve with under control on a leash access on the majority of the park
(outside of the sports fields) and under control off a leash north of the
stream adjacent to West End Road
· to replace the under control off a leash rule on
Seddon Fields (outside of the sports fields) with under control on a leash
· to replace the under control off a leash rule on
Victoria Park (outside of the sports fields) with under control on a leash
· to enlarge the northern under control off-leash area
on Grey Lynn Park to north of the pathway running from Dryden Street to Arnold
Street
33. A total number of 53 submission points were
made on the parks and reserves being consulted on. Of these submission points,
31 were regarding keeping the time and season rules for Cox’s Bay Reserve with
the under control off a leash access in the mornings being an important part of
their use and enjoyment of the park.
34. The table below provides an overview of the
issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 3: Parks
|
Decision sought
|
Reasons
|
Submission Points
|
|
General
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
· People
should be taught how to deal with dogs
· Dogs are a
positive for people
· Support responsible dog owners
|
1
|
|
Time and season -
Parks
|
|
Oppose proposal as
publicly notified
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
|
1
|
|
Support proposal as
publically notified - Make park and beach time and season rules the same
|
· Rules are
overly complicated
|
2
|
|
Cox’s Bay Reserve
|
|
Oppose proposal as
publicly notified - Keep existing time and season with under control off a leash
dog access in the mornings and evenings
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Park is
primarily used by dog walkers in the mornings
· Not used
by others at this time
· Existing
rules work well and are well understood
· No
suitable alternative areas
· Dogs need
adequate exercise and socialisation opportunities
· Dog owners
should be able to use the facilities that they pay for
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Dog owners
look after the park
|
31
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Support
responsible dog owners
|
4
|
|
Victoria Park
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
· Not many
alternative areas for dogs for under control off-leash activities
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Dogs need adequate exercise opportunities
|
4
|
|
Seddon Fields
|
|
Oppose proposal as
publicly notified - Allow dogs under control off a leash at all times
|
· No
suitable alternative areas that are safe for older people
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
· Support
responsible dog owners
|
4
|
|
Grey Lynn Park
|
|
Support proposal as
publicly notified - Extend the northern under control off a leash area
|
|
2
|
|
Extend the dog
exercise area
|
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Support
responsible dog owners
|
2
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
· Park is
primarily used for dog walking/exercising
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
|
2
|
Staff
comments
35. As
part of pre-consultation, Victoria Park was identified as a high use area by
Auckland Council parks and animal management staff and under control off-leash
was not considered to be appropriate given the intensity and nature of the use
of the park.
Submission
topic 4 – Picnic and fitness apparatus areas
36. The proposal is to remove the
general rules for picnic and fitness areas.
37. One submission point was received that
specifically addressed this topic. The submitter opposed the removal of the
picnic and fitness apparatus rule as they considered that it works well and is
well understood.
Staff comments
38. As
part of pre-consultation, Auckland Council parks and animal management staff
could not identify any picnic areas with easily identified boundaries or of a
meaningful size that justified a specific dog access rule, and did not consider
that fitness apparatus areas warranted dog access rules that are different from
the surrounding park rules.
Submission
topic 5 – Dog exercise areas
39. The
proposal is to reclassify Meola Reef within the fenced area as a designated dog
exercise area with all other dog exercise areas being identified as under
control off-leash areas (shared spaces).
40. A total of 11 submissions point
were made regarding dog exercise areas with eight submission points supporting
Meola Reef Reserve as a dog exercise area with a number wanting the fenced
exercise area expanded as it is over subscribed.
41. The table below provides an
overview of the issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 5: Dog exercise areas
|
Decision sought
|
Reasons
|
Submission Points
|
|
General
|
|
Support proposal as
publicly notified
|
|
1
|
|
Oppose proposal as
publicly notified
|
· Support responsible dog owners
· Proposal unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Dogs need adequate exercise opportunities
|
1
|
|
Meola Reef Reserve
|
|
Support proposal as
publicly notified
|
|
2
|
|
Extend the dog
exercise area
|
· Dogs help
with owners health and fitness
· Fenced area is small compared to the other dog parks in the area
|
6
|
|
Pt Erin
|
|
Support proposal as
publicly notified
|
· Dogs need adequate
exercise opportunities
|
1
|
Staff
comments
42. Only the fenced area on Meola Reef Reserve was identified by the Auckland Council parks and animal management staff as a dog
priority area with all other 22 parks being shared
spaces where dog owners are ‘shared user’ that would be more appropriately
referred to as ‘under control off-leash areas’.
Submission topic 6 - General comments on
dog access rules
43. A
number of submitters have provided feedback on dog access rules that is not
specific to any of the submission topics as outlined in the statement of
proposal and can be considered within any of the above
topics.
44. The
table below provides an overview of the issues raised including the reasons
why.
Table 6: General comments on dog access rules
|
Decision sought
|
Reasons
|
Submission Points
|
|
Support the proposal
as notified
|
· I don't
want dogs coming up to me when I am at a beach or park
· Dogs
frighten children
· Beaches
and parks are an important resource for non-dog owners
|
2
|
|
Oppose proposal as
publicly notified
|
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· More
restrictions will increase the intolerance non-dog owners to dogs
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Document
ill-conceived and unnecessarily complicated
· Evidence
does not support proposal
· Need a
wider acceptance of dog society
|
9
|
|
Allow dogs to be
under control on a leash at all times
|
· Dogs jump
on, lick, sniff, or paw children/adults
|
1
|
|
Provide more under
control off a leash dog access
|
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
|
3
|
|
Provide more dog
access
|
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
|
1
|
Submission topic 7 - Other
matters
45. The matters
within the decision-making scope of the Hearings Committee are limited to the
matters contained in the proposal (Attachment A).
46. Matters raised
by submitters outside this scope are included in this section for completeness.
Should the Hearings Committee wish to consider any of these matters an
additional (and separate) process is required.
47. The table below
provides an overview of the issues raised including the reasons why.
Table 7: Other matters
|
Decision sought
|
Reasons
|
Submission Points
|
|
Other matters: Dog
parks
|
|
Provide more 'dog
parks'
|
· Support responsible dog owners
· I avoid visiting beaches or parks if there are
likely to be dogs there
|
2
|
|
Other matters:
Facilities
|
|
Cox’s Bay Reserve -
Provide amenities (e.g. dog bins and bags)
|
· Support responsible dog owners
|
2
|
|
Grey Lynn Park -
Provide a sanded exercise area to allow all season use
|
|
2
|
|
Grey Lynn Park -
Extend the fence for the dog exercise area and better upkeep of the dog exercise
area
|
· Greater use of the park justifies better
upkeep
|
1
|
|
Other matters:
Compliance and enforcement
|
|
Council should
provide more patrols, especially in summer
|
· Owners don't try or are unable to control
their dogs
|
2
|
|
Cox’s Bay Reserve -
Enforce the existing rules
|
|
1
|
|
Other matters:
Signage and information provision
|
|
Better signage at
access points to parks and beaches
|
· Beaches and parks are an important resource
for non-dog owners
|
2
|
|
Provide maps so
people can make informed submissions
|
· People don't know what the changes are without
maps
|
1
|
|
Other matters:
Auckland Domain
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
· Dogs need adequate exercise opportunities
|
1
|
|
Other matters:
Western Park
|
|
Allow dogs under
control off a leash at all times
|
|
2
|
|
Other matters:
Cox’s Bay Reserve
|
|
Extend the dog exercise area - Allow
sports fields not in use available to dog owners
|
· No
suitable alternative areas that are safe for older people
· Dogs need
adequate exercise opportunities
· Proposal
unfair to dog owners, too restrictive
· Dogs need
to be able to run and enjoy socialisation with each other
· Dog owners
should be able to use the facilities that they pay for
· Dogs
should be able to use sports fields when not in use
· Mainly
used by dog owners
· Support
responsible dog owners
· Dogs help
with owners health and fitness
|
6
|
Staff
comments
48. 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.
49. Council’s
Licencing and Compliance Services provides enforcement and education services.
50. The use of sports fields on Cox’s Bay Reserve
is governed by the region-wide prohibition of dogs on all sports surfaces and
cannot be changed by the local board.
51. The matters
relating to the Auckland Domain are under the control of the Auckland Domain Committee and will be reviewed at the same time as
the other regional parks are reviewed.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Statement of Proposal - Amendments to Auckland Council
Policy on Dogs 2012 – Waitemata Local Board
|
19
|
|
bView
|
Decision-making requirements
|
41
|
|
cView
|
Submissions Received
|
47
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Justin Walters - Policy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws
Judith Webster - Relationship Manager
|
