Agenda of Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

Board Member

Organisation

Position

James Colville

St Marys Church Wellsford, Parish Council

Federated Farmers Auckland

Wellsford Drama Club

Wellsford Promotions

Landowners and Contractors Protection Assn.

Member

Warren Flaunty, QSM

Westgate Pharmacy Ltd

NorSGA Properties Ltd

The Trust Community Foundation Ltd

Henderson-Massey Local Board

Waitemata District Health Board

Taupaki Residents and Ratepayers Assn.

Contractor/Director

Director

Member

Elected Member

Member

Steven Garner

(Deputy Chairperson)

Mahurangi College Board of Trustee

Warkworth Tennis and Squash Club

Trustee

Member

Thomas Grace

Kumeu Rotary

South Kaipara Community Patrol

Rally New Zealand

Targa New Zealand

Waimauku Lions

Auckland Conservation Board

Federated Farmers

Northern Sports Car Club

Graceland Properties

Kumeu Community Patrol

President

Member

Director

Member

Beth Houlbrooke

Greater Auckland Chorus (Charitable Trust)

Sweet Adelines New Zealand (Charitable Trust)

ACT NZ
ACT NZ

Baddeleys and Campbells Beach Residents and Ratepayers Assn.

Member

Vice President

Employee

Member

John McLean

Albany CoCo

De Paul House

Furniture for Schools Charitable Trust

Newpark Financial

Coatesville Residents and Ratepayers Association

Member

Donor

Trustee

Shareholder

Member

Phelan Pirrie

Muriwai Environmental Action Community Trust

North West District Business Association

Muriwai Community Association

Muriwai Volunteer Fire Brigade

Best Berries (NZ) Ltd

Trustee

Member

Officer in Charge

Director/Shareholder

Greg Sayers

Rotary Club of Auckland

Neighbourhood Support Rodney

Member

Brenda Steele

(Chairperson)

Te Uri o Hau

Ngati Whatua o Kaipara

Woodhill School Board of Trustees

Beneficiary

Trustee

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

An apology from Member WW Flaunty and BP Houlbrooke has 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 Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 3 August 2015, as a true and correct record.

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 Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee. 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.

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Funding request - Warkworth Area Business Association

File No.: CP2015/19838

Purpose

1. This report requests final approval of funding of $23,500 for Warkworth Area Business Association’s (WABA) progress toward establishment as a Business Improvement District (BID).

Executive Summary

2. Rodney Local Board approved funding of $53,500 for the Warkworth BID establishment process from the 2014-2015 financial year. Resolution RD/2014/173.

3. Resolution RD/2014/173 was later amended to approve $35,000 from the 2014-2015 budget, and $23,500 from the 2015-2016 local board budget was approved in principle.

4. With work proceeding in the second year of the establishment process, WABA are seeking final approval of the funding that was approved in principle ($23,500).

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a). approve funding of $23,500 for the Warkworth Area Business Association Business Improvement District establishment process from the 2015-2016 budget, Locally Driven Initiatives, line item “Support Wellsford/Te Hana and Warkworth BIDs.”

Comments

5. At its December 2014 meeting Rodney Local Board approved in principle the allocation of $23,500 for the Business Improvement District establishment process for Warkworth in the 2015-2016 financial year subject to final approval by the local board. Resolution RD/2014/291.

6. The WABA executive committee has agreed that a BID in Warkworth will enable the business community to manage a programme of services and events to bring more business to the area, and adapt to the growth that is projected in the Unitary Plan. Attachment A outlines the area of the proposed BID establishment boundaries.

7. The Warkworth BID establishment process, begun in July 2014, is proceeding towards a ballot in late March or early April, and BID establishment 1 July 2016 if approved.

8. An innovation to the establishment process is being trialed in Warkworth. This is the use of a local business service provider with business community contacts in place and a separate resource providing strategic oversight and guidance. Feedback from the process to date confirms this is particularly relevant for Warkworth.

9. The $23,500 in funds requested will be used to:

a) Refine the database of businesses and property owners to be sure it includes all those eligible to vote in the balloting process.

b) Prepare a plan of programmes and events that their targeted rates would be used for, and estimate costs of those programmes.

c) Develop the communications plan including public events, collateral materials, electronic media, and programme schedule for implementation in the 2015-2016 year.

d) Hold business community workshops to provide information on the process and collect feedback for the WABA committee and Council

e) Cover the cost of the ballot which is estimated to be about $6000.

10. WABA will continue to utilise its own funds and volunteers to provide networking and events during the build up to establishment.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

11. Rodney Local Board approved funding in the amount of $53,500 at their August 2014 meeting for costs of the BID establishment process.

12. Rodney Local Board at their December 2014 meeting amended resolution RD2014/173 to allocate $35,000 for the Warkworth BID establishment process instead of the previously granted $53,500 for the 2014-2015 financial year.

13. The local board also approved in principle the allocation of $23,500 for the Warkworth Business Improvement District establishment process in the 2015-2016 financial year, subject to final approval of the local board noting that this is an additional $5,000 from the original resolution RD2014/173.

Māori impact statement

14. Rodney has a similar proportion of residents of Māori ethnicity, 10% (2013 Census), as the Auckland region. Maori will be impacted as business and property owners, employees, and customers of the Warkworth area to the same effect as other Aucklanders.

Implementation

15. Action by the local board to provide funding for the Warkworth BID Establishment process to reflect costs of the second year of a two year process. Implementation will involve developing the database for balloting, consultation with the business community, preparing promotional material, conducting an informational campaign, holding meetings, culminating in a formal ballot of property owners and businesses in the proposed BID boundary.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Final BID Map for Warkworth August 2015	9

Signatories

Authors

Steven Branca - BID Partnership Advisor

Authorisers

Gillian Plume - Team Leader BID Partnership

John Duguid - Acting GM - Plans and Places

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Proposed Road Name: Cash Cow Road

File No.: CP2015/19993

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee’s approval for a new road name in the Hawkins Road subdivision at Hawkins Road, Ahuroa.

Executive Summary

2. The applicant wishes to name the road as Cash Cow Road within the 13 lot rural residential subdivision.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) approve the new road name under section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 of Cash Cow Road for the subdivision at Hawkins Road, Ahuroa, Council reference R58771.

Comments

3. The applicant is Glen Ashton of Cash Cow Limited, the site address Hawkins Road, Ahuroa and the council reference is R58771.

4. This 13 rural – residential- lot subdivision was approved in 2013.

5. The proposed road name for the new road (Lot 12) is: Cash Cow Road to be associated with the current owner (Cash Cow Limited) who has owned and farmed the land for the last 15 years. Two alternative names are proposed – Beef Hill Road and Cow Hill Road. Kaumoni Road and Pukepiwhi Road are Maori equivalents of these alternatives and Arakaumoni Road is the maori equivalent of Cash Cow Road.

6. Consultation with the local Iwi has been undertaken in the road naming process. Iwi representative Haahi walker from Ngati Whatua o Kaipara has not given support for the use of Maori names. The Linz database has been examined and the chosen names are unused and unique.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

7. A decision is sought from the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee to approve the new road name.

Māori impact statement

8. The applicant has approached iwi who has suggested using a European name for the proposed road name.

Implementation

9. The Land Information database confirms that there are no similar road names in the area and that these names are unique.

10. If and when the name is approved the developer will be advised and he is responsible for erecting the new road name sign.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Scheme Plan	13
b View	Locality Plan	15

Signatories

Authors	Frank Lovering – Land Surveyor, Northern Resource Consenting
Authorisers	Bonnie Lees – Lead Consent & Performance Specialist, Northern Resource Consenting

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Proposed Road Names: Peak Village Road, Magnolia Lane, Lancewood Lane, Michelia Lane, Liquidamber Lane and Orchard Lane

File No.: CP2015/19999

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Rodney Local Board’ Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee’s approval for new road names in the Peak Village Developments Ltd subdivision at Peak Road, Kaukapakapa.

Executive Summary

2. The applicant wishes to name the roads as Peak VIillage Road, Magnolia Lane, Lanewood Lane, Michelia Lane, Liquidamber Lane and Orchard Lane within the 51 lot residential subdivision.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) approve the new road names under section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 of Peak VIillage Road, Magnolia Lane, Lanewood Lane, Michelia Lane, Liquidamber Lane and Orchard Lane for the subdivision off Peak Road, Kaukapakapa, Council reference R50832C.

Comments

3. The applicant is Peak Village Developments Ltd, the site address is 34 Peak Road, Kaukapakapa and the council reference is 50832C.

4. This 51 residential- lot subdivision was approved in 2012. The subdivision is nearing completion and marketing is underway.

5. The proposed road names have come about by employing a branding strategy and the wish to name the roads around the subdivision’s landscaping plan. They have used Macrocarpa post and rail signage to display the street names. See below.

6. The developer has designed this subdivision with private ways instead of public roads and on-site waste water and stormwater treatment plants. A Body corporate comprising all the land owners will manage the on-going running and maintenance of the development.

7. With the roads, (rights of way), not vesting in Council, the developer was under the impression that he did not need to obtain approval for the road naming so went ahead and chose the names and had the road name plates engraved in macrocarpa, as illustrated above.

8. Consultation with the local Iwi has been undertaken in the road naming process. Iwi representative Georgina Parata from Ngati Whatua o Kaipara has given support for the use of the plant names and forwarded the approval request on to a local marae for comment. At this time nothing else has been received.

9. The Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) database has been examined and the chosen names are mostly unused and unique in this region. A LINZ road naming expert has been spoken to about the other similar names and her view is that LINZ will accept the names which have sufficient geographical separation and different suburb name. The list below shows where similar names / types are in use.

Chosen Name	Existing/similar name and location
Peak Village Road:	Peak Road, adjoining
Magnolia Lane	Magnolia Terrace, Albany
Lancewood Lane	Lancewood Avenue, Titirangi
Liquidamber Lane	Liquidamber Drive, Hobsonville
Orchard Lane	Orchard Lane, Huapai; Orchard Terrace, Riverhead

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. A decision is sought from the Rodney Local Board to approve the new road names.

Māori impact statement

11. The applicant has approached iwi who has supported the chosen names.

Implementation

12. The Land Information database and LINZ road naming expert confirms that these names are unique in this locality.

13. If and when the names are approved the developer will be advised and he is responsible for erecting and maintaining the new road name signs.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Peak Village Scheme Plan A	21
b View	Peak Village Scheme Plan B	23
c View	Peak Village Locality Plan	25

Signatories

Authors	Frank Lovering – Land Surveyor, Northern Resource Consenting
Authorisers	Bonnie Lees – Lead Consent & Performance Specialist, Northern Resource Consenting

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Proposed Road Name: Anne Burton Drive

File No.: CP2015/20020

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Rodney Local Board’ Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee’s approval for a new road name in the North Star Estates Ltd subdivision at McKinney Road, Warkworth.

Executive Summary

2. The applicant wishes to name the road as Anne Burton Drive within the 199 lot residential subdivision.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) approve the new road name under section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 of Anne Burton Drive for the subdivision off Ngahau Street, Warkworth, Council reference R56088.

Comments

3. The applicant is North Star Estates Limited, the site address is off Ngahau Street, Warkworth and the council reference is R56088.

4. This 199 residential-lot subdivision was approved in 2013. The subdivision is being developed in collaboration with two other developers.

5. The proposed road name for the new road (Road 7) in stage 1A is Anne Burton Drive. Anne was a property developer who had a long history with the Warkworth area and was involved with the local hospice. She died some years ago. Two alternative names are proposed – Rōreka Drive and Mataora Drive. Rōreka means “sweet singing” and Mataora means “alive, living”. Rōreka (“sweet singing”) is complementary to Ngahau Street, which means state of enjoyment, dance or entertainment”.

6. The family of Anne Burton has been contacted and they are happy to have this name used.

7. Consultation with the local Iwi has been undertaken in the road naming process. Iwi representative Fiona McKenzie from Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust has given support for the use of Anne Burton Drive or Mataora Drive but offered Rōreka Drive as another option.

8. The Land Information New Zealand database has been examined and the chosen names are unused and unique in this region.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

9. A decision is sought from the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee to approve the new road name.

Māori impact statement

10. The applicant has approached iwi who has supported the chosen name and offered another as an alternative.

Implementation

11. The Land Information database confirms that there are no similar road names in the area and that these names are unique.

12. If and when the name is approved the developer will be advised and he is responsible for erecting the new road name sign.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Scheme Plan	29
b View	Locality Map	31

Signatories

Authors	Frank Lovering – Land Surveyor, Northern Resource Consenting
Authorisers	Bonnie Lees – Lead Consent & Performance Specialist, Northern Resource Consenting

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Proposed Road Name: Penney Rise

File No.: CP2015/20027

Purpose

1. The purpose of this report is to seek the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee’s approval for a new road name in the MVR Ltd subdivision at Laly Haddon Place, Matakana.

Executive Summary

2. The applicant wishes to name the road as Penney Rise within the 40 lot residential subdivision.

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) approve the new road name under section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 of Penney Rise for the subdivision off Laly Haddon Place, Matakana, Council reference R57104A.

Comments

3. The applicant is MVR Limited, the site address is off Laly Haddon Place, Matakana and the council reference is R57104A.

4. This 40 residential-lot subdivision is complete and a short spur road at the top of Laly Haddon Place, leading to adjoining land not yet developed, is also to be named as a condition of the subdivision consent.

5. The adjoining land has been owned by a variety of owners in the past and it is difficult to single out any one of these with particular interest in the land.

6. The “Penney” Family, who are the current owners (in the name of Dawn Penney), are long-term Matakana residents, land owners and farmers, and well known and respected in the locality.

7. The applicant has been in contact with the Penney family and they have agreed to the use of their name in this context and the applicant suggests that as the location, and proposed extension of the road onto the “Penney” land, is on the crest of a hill overlooking Matakana, that the Road be named “Penney Rise”.

8. Consultation with the local Iwi has been undertaken and Iwi representative Fiona McKenzie from Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust has given support for the use of the name of the Penney whanau.

9. The Land Information New Zealand database has been examined and the chosen name is unused and unique in this locality. There is a Penney Avenue in Mt Roskill which will not conflict with this name.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

10. A decision is sought from the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee to approve the new road name.

Māori impact statement

11. The applicant has approached iwi who has supported the chosen name.

Implementation

12. The Land Information database confirms that there are no similar road names in the area and that this name is unique.

13. If and when the name is approved the developer will be advised and he is responsible for erecting the new road name sign.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Penney Rise Scheme Plan	35
b View	Penney Rise Locality Map	37

Signatories

Authors	Frank Lovering – Land Surveyor, Northern Resource Consenting
Authorisers	Bonnie Lees – Lead Consent & Performance Specialist, Northern Resource Consenting

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Request for Feedback on Auckland Stormwater Infrastructure Network Discharge Consent Application

File No.: CP2015/20249

Purpose

1. To request feedback from the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee on the application for the Auckland wide network discharge consent for the operation of stormwater infrastructure, and the identified stormwater management priorities for their area.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is seeking formal feedback from the Rodney Local Board on the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent (NDC).

3. If approved, this consent will allow the diversion and discharge of water from the urban public stormwater network.

4. Council is seeking a 35 year, process based, consent as it allows for greater flexibility in managing stormwater issues, such as flooding, stream health and asset maintenance and renewal. The consent will support the implementation of a water sensitive design approach to infrastructure development in Auckland.

5. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input into the consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management.

6. It is requested the local board provide feedback by end of October 2015 if feasible.

Recommendation

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) provides feedback on the draft stormwater network discharge consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management.

Comments

Background

7. Auckland Council is developing an application for a network discharge consent (NDC) to allow for the diversion and discharge of stormwater from the urban public stormwater infrastructure.

8. The consent will be valid for 35 years with a requirement that it will be reviewed on a six yearly basis. The consent will both guide council’s management of stormwater infrastructure, and address priority issues such as reducing the risk of flooding, improving freshwater quality and managing the stormwater impacts of growth and development. Further information on the NDC is provided in Attachment A.

9. Through development of the consent a number of stormwater priorities for the local board area have been identified, such as growth priority areas to be supported to achieve water sensitive design and issues relating to stream and catchment health.

10. These stormwater priorities are described in more detail in the report below and in the table appended at Attachment B. This table also shows the targets for stormwater management and how priorities for action in the local board area relate to these.

11. This report provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input into the consent application, with particular reference to local priorities for stormwater management. Paragraphs 7 to 15 below suggest three questions which may guide how the local board frames its feedback alongside comments noted by stormwater staff, and the local board at a workshop in April 2015.

Question 1: Does the Rodney Local Board have any comments on the proposed framework of the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent?

12. As a reminder it is proposed that the consent be processed based, with the following key elements to address the 7 stormwater issues:

a) Identification of regional priority areas

b) “Business as usual” processes.

c) Setting of objectives, outcomes and targets, as well as associated 6 yearly reviews.

13. Table One in Attachment B summarises what the above elements will mean for the management of stormwater infrastructure within the Rodney Local Board area. This table identifies how the stream subcatchments within the local board area have been ranked within the regional prioritisation for each stormwater issue. Identified high priority areas will be the focus of further investigation and assessment for future infrastructure upgrades and projects, which in turn could ultimately become part of council’s work programme.

14. It is noted that Table One incorporates feedback received as part of the consultation exercise recently completed on the stormwater management priorities for the Hibiscus and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment. A summary of this feedback is included in Attachment B.

15. Based on the above, a 35 year consent is being sought (which reflects the longest timeframe available for a consent).

16. During the presentation held on 20 April 2015, the local board was generally supportive of the NDC framework, though they raised some points as discussed below.

Question 2: Is there any feedback the local board would like to provide relating to the management of the public stormwater network?

17. The following questions were raised by the local board during the 20 April presentation:

18. What does the Unitary Plan require in terms of farmers clearing drains or creating drains and dams on their land? That is, what is the threshold between maintenance and when resource consent is required?

19. Council officer response: In general, the following maintenance activities are permitted; that is there is no need for consent: channel clearance less than 100m as well as clearance and maintenance of structures such as outfalls and dams. However this is subject to a number of requirements, such as extent of works, erosion protection, etc. A full assessment from planners should be requested for a complete set of requirements for any given location.

20. How many and what types of consents were currently granting discharges along the Kumeu River?

21. Council officer response: The following network discharge consents are in place for urban settlements along the Kumeu River: Kumeu Huapai, Lower Kaipara, Kaukapakapa, and Parakai. They will be surrendered once the Auckland-wide Network Discharge Consent is granted. The surrendering process will however include a review of the conditions and requirements of these consents, to determine if they have been satisfactorily transferred to the new consent.

22. A list was requested regarding what was required from developers before we would allow them to come under the NDC.

23. Council officer response: The proposed standards under the Auckland-wide Stormwater Network Discharge Consent are included in Attachment C. To clarify, if a developer can meet these requirements, they can easily come under the NDC to authorise their discharges.

24. If they cannot meet these criteria, they must outline why their proposal is nonetheless considered the best design, as well as demonstrate that it still meets the proposed objectives and outcomes of the consent.

25. If they cannot achieve this, the developer will need to get their own consent, and not be able to vest assets to council. As the future asset owner, the stormwater unit must certify each development it approves to come under the consent.

26. It must be noted that these criteria are draft and are likely to be refined as the consent is processed. This could include the incorporation of comments from Local Boards. The criteria are also designed to align with the land use, flooding, stream protection and treatment requirements under the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. Should these aspects of the proposed Unitary Plan change as it becomes operative, then the criteria will need to be reviewed and potentially updated.

Question 3: Are there any initiatives relating to stormwater management that the Local Board is investigating, in addition to those identified in the Rodney Local Board Plan?

27. For reference, the following initiatives are identified in the Rodney Local Board Plan relating to improving stream and coastal health:

· “Prioritise the Kumeu, Helensville, and Kaukapakapa river flood protection projects.”

· “Support community groups to undertake environmental restoration and preservation.

· “Support communities to get involved in improving water quality in our rivers and harbours.”

· “Support community-led projects to improve septic tank systems and community education on best practice.”

Next steps

28. Feedback on this consent is being sought from all local boards and from Auckland mana whenua. It is expected that this consultation will be completed by October 2015.

29. Once consultation on this consent has been completed it will then be finalised and presented to the Regulatory Officers in late 2015.

30. If approved, the consent is likely to become active by mid 2016 and will help to guide stormwater management going forward.

31. While not all stormwater-related issues can be addressed through the network discharge consent process, any additional feedback on stormwater management the board provides will be provided to the relevant council staff to be addressed in the appropriate fashion.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

32. This report asks for feedback from the Rodney Local Board on stormwater management priorities for their local area.

Māori impact statement

33. Stormwater and environmental management have integral links with the mauri of the environment and concepts of kaitiakitanga. Council recognises the significance of stormwater management to mana whenua.

34. Consultation on this draft Network Discharge Consent is currently being carried out with all Auckland iwi who have indicated an interest in being involved in this project. Mana whenua have also been consulted on development of the Waitematā Harbour, Manukau Harbour and Greater Tāmaki Consolidated Receiving Environment and their feedback has informed this consent.

Implementation

35. If approved, the implementation of this Network Discharge Consent can be carried out within existing council budgets and resources.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Further information regarding the region wide Network Discharge Consent	43
b View	What the Network Discharge Consent will mean for stormwater management in the Rodney Local Board area	47
c View	Table of proposed developer requirements	57

Signatories

Authors

Guia Nonoy - Relationship Advisor

Janet Kidd, Healthy Waterways Programme Lead

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Attachment A – Further Information on the Proposed Auckland Stormwater Network Discharge Consent

Why the regional stormwater Network Discharge Consent is Important

1. The Auckland Council stormwater unit, is responsible for the delivery of Auckland Council’s infrastructure stormwater management functions. This includes:

i. Operating and maintaining an extensive network of existing stormwater infrastructure;

ii. Working with stakeholders, in a city that is growing rapidly, to better understand and manage:

a) flood risk and

b) the effects of stormwater diversion and discharge on streams, groundwater and coastal waters.

2. As the council stormwater infrastructure authority, the stormwater unit is in the process of obtaining a “Network Discharge Consent (NDC).’ This is required under the Resource Management Act (1991), the Auckland Regional Plan: Air Land and Water, Auckland Regional Plan: Coastal, and the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

3. A stormwater NDC is needed to authorise the following activities:

i. diversion of stormwater from existing and potential future public networks with urban areas, and in rural and coastal settlements; and

ii. discharge of contaminants from diffuse sources in these areas (not point source discharges).

4. The Auckland Stormwater NDC will set out a framework for managing these issues from the public stormwater infrastructure including

i. How the community, environmental, and cultural issues caused by the stormwater network infrastructure will be assessed, prioritised and managed.

ii. How physical upgrade projects, aimed at improve stormwater management in these priority areas, will be authorised.

iii. How council’s stormwater unit will work with stakeholders, including Local Boards, on implementing non-structural initiatives aimed at improving community and environmental outcomes in managing stormwater. Examples of this include community planting of riparian margins, pollution prevention education, and inputting into regulating documents such as the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

iv. How future stormwater assets vested to the council by developers will be controlled in terms of achieving the best practicable environmental and community outcomes.

5. The stormwater NDC will include all the public stormwater network within urban areas, including the stormwater network that receives and discharges stormwater from Council roading. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are both committed to working together as set out below on achieving the outcomes of the consent.

Scope of the consent

6. The NDC will seek to authorise:

þ The diversion of surface water from existing impervious surfaces in existing urban areas that enters, and is subsequently discharged from, the Council’s stormwater network. “Urban areas” incorporate urban zoned land within rural and coastal settlements.

þ Stormwater discharges from the council’s and AT’s existing stormwater network to streams, rivers, lakes, coastal marine area, land and groundwater; and the contaminants normally associated with urban runoff.

þ Diversion from future impervious surfaces of existing urban areas to public stormwater networks that are existing, created by or vested to council, undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the applicable District Plan (and the Unitary Plan in the future) or relevant designation, subject to meeting appropriate stormwater management requirements which are to be put in place to mitigate effects resulting from changes in stormwater volumes, flow, location of discharges and water quality (including impervious areas created by AT).

þ Diversion from future impervious surfaces from future urban areas (e.g. greenfield sites) to public stormwater networks that are existing, created by or vested to council, subject to meeting appropriate stormwater management requirements and/or integrated stormwater and land use planning processes, which are to be put in place to mitigate effects resulting from changes in stormwater volumes, flow, location of discharges and water quality .

þ Stormwater infrastructure maintenance and upgrades that result in changes to netowrk discharges in terms of catchment flows (such as changes to volumes, flow rates, and location for council, as well as changes in quality for AT).

þ Runoff from the state highway network, where it enters and then is discharged from the council network.

7. The NDC will not authorise:

ý Stream and Coastal Structures. These will generally rely on permitted activity status under the relevant regional/unitary plans to authorise existing structures in the beds of lakes and rivers or in the CMA (including culverts and streams outfalls). Separate Auckland wide consents will be obtained as required to authorise existing dams, coastal and stream structures in defined areas, as defined under Section 12 and 13 of the Resource Management Act.

ý Project related consents, such as working in the drip line of tree or earthworks. This will be assessed and sought on a case-by-case basis for each project. Auckland wide resource consents may be sought for these activities; however, they will not form part of the NDC.

ý Discharges from wastewater network (including those that may enter the stormwater network). These will be consented by WaterCare Services Limited.

ý Roads and impervious areas in rural areas. These will rely on the permitted activity status for stormwater discharges from existing impervious areas, with resource consents being obtained for new roads/extensions by Auckland Transport as necessary.

ý Contaminant discharges from industrial and trade activities, as well as discharges from earthworks during urban development. These are to be managed through the private consenting processes and compliance monitoring programmes.

ý Private stormwater networks and/or private treatment devices that are not subsequently vested to Council. These are to be managed through the private consenting processes, as well as through the implementation of the Stormwater Bylaw.

Why an Auckland-wide NDC is Being Sought

8. Discharges from about half of the Auckland’s urban region are currently authorised through existing network discharge consents. However, as these existing consents vary in age and were prepared by different legacy territorial authorities, there is a significant difference in the scope and nature of their conditions. In addition, stormwater discharges from the remaining half of the region’s urban area are not yet consented, but rather are only at an application stage.

9. This situation is unsatisfactory. A patchwork of consents and other authorisations is complex, inefficient and confusing, and leads to different requirements across the region. Auckland Council therefore is committed to progressing a network discharge consent for the whole of the Auckland region as a matter of priority.

10. A single, NDC will be sought as:

i. The majority of stormwater planning, operations, development and other functions are undertaken on a regional basis. These regional processes direct effort and investment to achieving the best overall outcomes for the community and natural environment at both a regional and local scale. This is in line with the vision in the Auckland Plan.

ii. It will replace the many, different consent and other authorisations that currently exist across the region with a single, consistent consent. This will enable current best practice to be implemented across the region and simplify existing requirements and compliance issues, both Auckland Council’s own stormwater capital upgrades and for assets to be vested to the council by developers.

Proposed review mechanisms of council’s stormwater management performance

11. The 6-yearly NDC targets proposed provide a review mechanism for assessing how well council is progressing in regards to achieving their management objectives and the NDC outcomes.

12. This review mechanism has been put in place to reflect the ever changing nature of stormwater management as a result of:

i. New technology, understanding and regulation. Technological advances, improved understanding of the environment and related effects, and changes in legislation are always occurring. For example, the future implementation of the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management is anticipated to affect the management of urban stormwater infrastructure, as is the finalisation of the Unitary Plan.

ii. Changing community expectations, as borne out through the Local Government Act Long Term Planning and Asset Management Plan processes.

13. The proposed review mechanism through these targets will enable the consent to remain up-to-date. The review will be based on consultation with key stakeholders, such as Local Boards, as well as environmental and operational monitoring to be undertaken. This monitoring will be set out in a Regional Monitoring Plan to be compiled by Auckland Council’s stormwater unit as part of the consent conditions.

14. Where the review identifies substantial changes to the NDC outcomes are anticipated, a change of consent conditions may be sought.

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Table 1 What the Proposed NDC Framework will mean for the Management of Stormwater Infrastructure within the Rodney Local Board area

*Stormwater Issue*	Identified High Priority Areas for the Rodney Local Board	Proposed General Management of all Stormwater Infrastructure	Proposed Strategic Objectives	Outcomes Sought	Proposed Performance Targets to be Review Every 6 years
Effects from assets	An assessment of potential critical pipes has been completed at a regional level, taking into account factors such as age, material, location, etc. Identified high priority areas will be further investigated using CCTV, in order to identify potential future infrastructure upgrades. No areas of potential highly critical pipes have been identified within the Rodney Local Board (areas depicted in green below). Any issues related to assets will therefore be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.	· Maintain stormwater network. · Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets · Regularly update asset management database. · Continue to develop, review and implement criticality assessment strategies for all asset types. · Respond to complaints and regularly review complaints to identify potential renewals. · Regularly work with other infrastructure providers on redevelopment opportunities.	Safe Communities: Ensure that risk to people and property is managed to levels that have been established in consultation with our community, and reduce existing flood risk where they are above these levels.	Manage existing public stormwater assets to meet agreed levels of service. Manage erosion effects caused by discharges from the public stormwater infrastructure.	a) Survey 95% of critical assets every 5 years (from LTP) b) Grade 4 critical assets will be repaired or renewed within 5 years (from LTP) c) Grade 5 highly critical assets will be repaired or renewed within 24 months of identification (from LTP) d) Number of blockages in the stormwater network per 100km will be less than 20 per annum. (from LTP) e) The number of complaints received about the performance of the stormwater network per 1000 properties connected to Auckland Council’s stormwater network will be less than 3 per 1000. (from LTP)
Effects from growth	Stormwater unit regional priority areas are based on Council Growth Priority Areas. The Stormwater Unit will work with Council planners, the Housing Project Office and developers in the compiling stormwater catchment management plans for these areas, promoting water sensitive design. SHAs are located in Rodney Local Board area, in particular in the Kumeu-Huapai area (depicted as coloured areas below). Any issues related to growth will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.	· Set out clear environmental and operational standards for stormwater assets to be vested to Council from development. · Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use requirements, promoting water sensitive design. · Provide information to the development community such as flood modelling, design guidance and requirements, and clear asset information. · Work with other infrastructure providers in identifying upgrade projects and redevelopment opportunities.	Support Growth: Support new and re-developed areas through undertaking effective stormwater management and good quality infrastructure and development in a way that meets the needs of our communities and maintains and enhances natural water systems.	Align stormwater infrastructure planning and provision to development and intensification priorities. Integrate water sensitive design into new and major re-development. This includes promoting the use of green infrastructure, on-site treatment as well as the protection of streams. Enable effective land use and stormwater management planning and co-operation between developers and infrastructure providers. Establish clear standards and processes for the planning, development and vesting of good quality public stormwater infrastructure, particularly in terms of minimising operational and renewal costs, as well as minimising community, environmental and cultural effects.	a) Input into stormwater management plans, including those prepared by developers, in response to all high priority growth areas during structure planning and consenting processes.
Flooding	Coarse flood modelling has been completed for the region. Detailed flood modelling is being updated and underway for areas of Rodney (depicted as per the blue area below), and will be used to refine the number of habitable floor levels potentially affected by flooding. Infrastructure upgrades will be investigated for areas with the highest numbers of habitable floors affected in the region.	· Maintain stormwater network. · Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets · Provide flood modelling, design guidance and requirements, clear vesting requirements, and clear asset information · Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use planning, promoting protection of floodplains. · Develop flood resilience strategies for habitable floors that are found to be unfeasible to protect from flooding within 30 years. · Assist Civil Defence in flood prediction and warning, as well as in flood recovery planning. · Work with other infrastructure providers on identifying and addressing flooding through redevelopment opportunities, as well as the identification of critical infrastructure. · Engage with Local Boards to identify any ongoing flooding issues.	Safe Communities: Ensure that risk to people and property is managed to levels that have been established in consultation with our community, and reduce existing flood risk where they are above these levels	Work towards ensuring urban development and intensification does not increase existing flooding of habitable floors and does not result in new flooding of habitable floors. Take the opportunity provided by redevelopment to reduce existing flood risk. Manage existing flood risk to meet levels of service agreed to keep people and property safe from significant harm from flooding, and minimise disruption to critical social and physical infrastructure connections across the city. Work towards identifying areas of flooding that pose a risk to life, as well as to critical infrastructure.	a) 15 detailed flood hazard catchment mapping to be completed every 2 yrs. b) The number of flooding events and the associated number of habitable floors affected: less than 1 per 1000 properties in Auckland per annum. (from LTP) c) Total habitable floors are protected from flooding in a 1 in 10 year storm within 10 years: At least 99% (from LTP) d) Total habitable floors (Including commercial) are protected from flooding in a 1 in 100 year storm within 30yrs: at least 97.5% (from LTP) e) The median response time to attend a flooding event, measured from the time that Auckland Council receives notification to the time that service personnel reach site is 2 hours. (from LTP) f) Major flood protection and control structures are maintained to their original constructed standard. Any flood damage identified to the structures is addressed as soon as practicable. (from LTP)
Effects on stream health	Stream assessments have been completed for Kaukapakapa, Kumeu-Huapai, Warkworth and Leigh sub-catchments. See Figures 1a and 1 b for identified stream issues. The stormwater unit will investigate works: · On public land · Relating to public assets · To support stakeholders such as Local Boards, who are leading stream restoration projects in their area.	· Maintain stormwater network. · Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets · Support public education programmes · Complete assessment of possible interventions on private streams, taking into account amongst other things ownership, liability and access issues · Input into the development of Unitary Plan, advocating Water Sensitive Growth. This includes protection of streams and baseflow. · Assist in the development and provision of guidance on Water Sensitive Design. · Work with stakeholders such as the Local Boards and iwi through to identify potential collaboration projects for the enhancement of streams.	Healthy and Connected Waterways: Utilise streams, aquifers and harbours as integral natural components of Auckland’s stormwater system while reducing the adverse effects of stormwater runoff on, and work with other Council teams holistically to improve and enhance our community’s connection with, our waterways.	Prevent future and minimise existing effects directly attributable to the operation of the public stormwater infrastructure, such as erosion, temperature increases and fish passage barriers. Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on streams. Work collaboratively with key stakeholders such as mana whenua, Local Boards, community groups and the development community to take opportunities to enhance urban waterways where they arise, and progressively reduce the load of stormwater contaminants from urban catchments.	a) The ratio of the length of watercourse consented to be physically improved versus physically degraded in each year(kms Improved ÷ kms Degraded) 3 or more (from LTP) b) Average 3 stream assessments completed per year. c) Number of outfalls with erosion mitigated: average 5 per year d) Number of fish passage barriers mitigated: average 20 per year
Effects on Coastal health	Stormwater Unit regional priority areas have based on the presence of high contaminant generating land use, such as industrial and commercial areas, together with state of the receiving environment, with degraded areas being given a higher priority. It is proposed that a contaminant management strategy be completed to assess the sources of contamination affecting priority catchments, and possible mitigation. No regional priority areas have been identified in the Rodney Local Board area with respect to contaminants from the urban stormwater network (i.e no orange or red areas below). Any issues related to contaminants will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.	· Maintain stormwater network. · Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets · Support public education programmes · Provide information on treatment design guidance and requirements. · Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use planning, promoting water sensitive design, onsite treatment, prevention of new zinc roofing, treatment of high contaminant generating areas.	Healthy and Connected Waterways: Utilise streams, aquifers and harbours as integral natural components of Auckland’s stormwater system while reducing the adverse effects of stormwater runoff on, and work with other Council teams holistically to improve and enhance our community’s connection with, our waterways.	Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on the coast. Work collaboratively with key stakeholders such as mana whenua, Local Boards, community groups and the development community to take opportunities to enhance urban waterways where they arise, and progressively reduce the load of stormwater contaminants from urban catchments.	a) Volume of contaminants removed from the stormwater network via Auckland Councils maintenance and renewal programmes: 5,000 tons per annum for cess pit (from LTP) b) Volume of contaminants removed from the stormwater network via Auckland Councils maintenance and renewal programmes: 10,000 tons per annum from de-silting ponds and wetlands (from LTP)
Effects on groundwater health	With respect to groundwater quality, as above in terms of priority area for contaminant management, with high use aquifers identified as priority receiving environments. No regional priority areas have been identified in the Rodney Local Board area with respect to contaminants from the urban stormwater network. Any issues related to groundwater will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.	As above for contaminant management, as well as: · Input into the development of Unitary Plan, advocating Water Sensitive Growth. This includes recharge of high use aquifers, peat soils and stream baseflow. · Assist in the development and provision of guidance on Water Sensitive Design, as well as guidance on stormwater treatment and soakage design	Healthy and Connected Waterways: Utilise streams, aquifers and harbours as integral natural components of Auckland’s stormwater system while reducing the adverse effects of stormwater runoff on, and work with other Council teams holistically to improve and enhance our community’s connection with, our waterways.	Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on groundwater. Work collaboratively with key stakeholders such as mana whenua, Local Boards, community groups and the development community to take opportunities to enhance urban waterways where they arise, and progressively reduce the load of stormwater contaminants from urban catchments to aquifers and freshwater and estuarine areas.	As above.
Effects on wastewater network	In Rodney, there is concern of the leakage from septic tanks. Stormwater unit is supporting other teams in Auckland Council who are addressing this matter. In addition, priority will be given to areas that WaterCare are leading in terms of collaboration on infrastructure upgrades.	· Regularly meet with WaterCare to identify and design collaborative infrastructure upgrades. · Notify building control where wastewater infiltration and cross connections have been identified within areas that do not have combined sewers. · Increasing public awareness around the potential health risks associated with all flood waters, working with WaterCare and Civil Defence on this matter. · Collaborate with other arms of Council on managing leakages from septic tanks.	Healthy and Connected Waterways: Utilise streams, aquifers and harbours as integral natural components of Auckland’s stormwater system while reducing the adverse effects of stormwater runoff on, and work with other Council teams holistically to improve and enhance our community’s connection with, our waterways.	Work collaboratively with key stakeholders such as mana whenua, Local Boards, community groups and the development community to take opportunities to enhance urban waterways where they arise, and progressively reduce the load of stormwater contaminants from urban catchments to aquifers and freshwater and estuarine areas. Collaborate with Council departments and WaterCare that have a key role in delivering positive stormwater outcomes	Regularly work with WaterCare and other part of Council on wastewater matters.

Stormwater Issue

Identified High Priority Areas for the Rodney Local Board

Proposed General Management of all Stormwater Infrastructure

Proposed Strategic Objectives

Outcomes Sought

Proposed Performance Targets to be Review Every 6 years

Effects from assets

An assessment of potential critical pipes has been completed at a regional level, taking into account factors such as age, material, location, etc. Identified high priority areas will be further investigated using CCTV, in order to identify potential future infrastructure upgrades.

No areas of potential highly critical pipes have been identified within the Rodney Local Board (areas depicted in green below). Any issues related to assets will therefore be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.

· Maintain stormwater network.

· Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets

· Regularly update asset management database.

· Continue to develop, review and implement criticality assessment strategies for all asset types.

· Respond to complaints and regularly review complaints to identify potential renewals.

· Regularly work with other infrastructure providers on redevelopment opportunities.

Safe Communities:

Ensure that risk to people and property is managed to levels that have been established in consultation with our community, and reduce existing flood risk where they are above these levels.

Manage existing public stormwater assets to meet agreed levels of service.

Manage erosion effects caused by discharges from the public stormwater infrastructure.

a) Survey 95% of critical assets every 5 years (from LTP)

b) Grade 4 critical assets will be repaired or renewed within 5 years (from LTP)

c) Grade 5 highly critical assets will be repaired or renewed within 24 months of identification (from LTP)

d) Number of blockages in the stormwater network per 100km will be less than 20 per annum. (from LTP)

e) The number of complaints received about the performance of the stormwater network per 1000 properties connected to Auckland Council’s stormwater network will be less than 3 per 1000. (from LTP)

Effects from growth

Stormwater unit regional priority areas are based on Council Growth Priority Areas. The Stormwater Unit will work with Council planners, the Housing Project Office and developers in the compiling stormwater catchment management plans for these areas, promoting water sensitive design.

SHAs are located in Rodney Local Board area, in particular in the Kumeu-Huapai area (depicted as coloured areas below). Any issues related to growth will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.

· Set out clear environmental and operational standards for stormwater assets to be vested to Council from development.

· Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use requirements, promoting water sensitive design.

· Provide information to the development community such as flood modelling, design guidance and requirements, and clear asset information.

· Work with other infrastructure providers in identifying upgrade projects and redevelopment opportunities.

Support Growth:

Support new and re-developed areas through undertaking effective stormwater management and good quality infrastructure and development in a way that meets the needs of our communities and maintains and enhances natural water systems.

Align stormwater infrastructure planning and provision to development and intensification priorities.

Integrate water sensitive design into new and major re-development. This includes promoting the use of green infrastructure, on-site treatment as well as the protection of streams.

Enable effective land use and stormwater management planning and co-operation between developers and infrastructure providers.

Establish clear standards and processes for the planning, development and vesting of good quality public stormwater infrastructure, particularly in terms of minimising operational and renewal costs, as well as minimising community, environmental and cultural effects.

a) Input into stormwater management plans, including those prepared by developers, in response to all high priority growth areas during structure planning and consenting processes.

Flooding

Coarse flood modelling has been completed for the region. Detailed flood modelling is being updated and underway for areas of Rodney (depicted as per the blue area below), and will be used to refine the number of habitable floor levels potentially affected by flooding. Infrastructure upgrades will be investigated for areas with the highest numbers of habitable floors affected in the region.

· Maintain stormwater network.

· Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets

· Provide flood modelling, design guidance and requirements, clear vesting requirements, and clear asset information

· Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use planning, promoting protection of floodplains.

· Develop flood resilience strategies for habitable floors that are found to be unfeasible to protect from flooding within 30 years.

· Assist Civil Defence in flood prediction and warning, as well as in flood recovery planning.

· Work with other infrastructure providers on identifying and addressing flooding through redevelopment opportunities, as well as the identification of critical infrastructure.

· Engage with Local Boards to identify any ongoing flooding issues.

Safe Communities:

Ensure that risk to people and property is managed to levels that have been established in consultation with our community, and reduce existing flood risk where they are above these levels

Work towards ensuring urban development and intensification does not increase existing flooding of habitable floors and does not result in new flooding of habitable floors.

Take the opportunity provided by redevelopment to reduce existing flood risk.

Manage existing flood risk to meet levels of service agreed to keep people and property safe from significant harm from flooding, and minimise disruption to critical social and physical infrastructure connections across the city.

Work towards identifying areas of flooding that pose a risk to life, as well as to critical infrastructure.

a) 15 detailed flood hazard catchment mapping to be completed every 2 yrs.

b) The number of flooding events and the associated number of habitable floors affected: less than 1 per 1000 properties in Auckland per annum. (from LTP)

c) Total habitable floors are protected from flooding in a 1 in 10 year storm within 10 years: At least 99% (from LTP)

d) Total habitable floors (Including commercial) are protected from flooding in a 1 in 100 year storm within 30yrs: at least 97.5% (from LTP)

e) The median response time to attend a flooding event, measured from the time that Auckland Council receives notification to the time that service personnel reach site is 2 hours. (from LTP)

f) Major flood protection and control structures are maintained to their original constructed standard. Any flood damage identified to the structures is addressed as soon as practicable. (from LTP)

Effects on stream health

Stream assessments have been completed for Kaukapakapa, Kumeu-Huapai, Warkworth and Leigh sub-catchments. See Figures 1a and 1 b for identified stream issues.

The stormwater unit will investigate works:

· On public land

· Relating to public assets

· To support stakeholders such as Local Boards, who are leading stream restoration projects in their area.

· Maintain stormwater network.

· Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets

· Support public education programmes

· Complete assessment of possible interventions on private streams, taking into account amongst other things ownership, liability and access issues

· Input into the development of Unitary Plan, advocating Water Sensitive Growth. This includes protection of streams and baseflow.

· Assist in the development and provision of guidance on Water Sensitive Design.

· Work with stakeholders such as the Local Boards and iwi through to identify potential collaboration projects for the enhancement of streams.

Healthy and Connected Waterways:

Utilise streams, aquifers and harbours as integral natural components of Auckland’s stormwater system while reducing the adverse effects of stormwater runoff on, and work with other Council teams holistically to improve and enhance our community’s connection with, our waterways.

Prevent future and minimise existing effects directly attributable to the operation of the public stormwater infrastructure, such as erosion, temperature increases and fish passage barriers.

Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on streams.

Work collaboratively with key stakeholders such as mana whenua, Local Boards, community groups and the development community to take opportunities to enhance urban waterways where they arise, and progressively reduce the load of stormwater contaminants from urban catchments.

a) The ratio of the length of watercourse consented to be physically improved versus physically degraded in each year(kms Improved ÷ kms Degraded) 3 or more (from LTP)

b) Average 3 stream assessments completed per year.

c) Number of outfalls with erosion mitigated: average 5 per year

d) Number of fish passage barriers mitigated: average 20 per year

Effects on Coastal health

Stormwater Unit regional priority areas have based on the presence of high contaminant generating land use, such as industrial and commercial areas, together with state of the receiving environment, with degraded areas being given a higher priority.

It is proposed that a contaminant management strategy be completed to assess the sources of contamination affecting priority catchments, and possible mitigation.

No regional priority areas have been identified in the Rodney Local Board area with respect to contaminants from the urban stormwater network (i.e no orange or red areas below). Any issues related to contaminants will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.

· Maintain stormwater network.

· Enforce Stormwater By-law for problematic private assets

· Support public education programmes

· Provide information on treatment design guidance and requirements.

· Input into the Unitary Plan to ensure good stormwater management practice is brought into land use planning, promoting water sensitive design, onsite treatment, prevention of new zinc roofing, treatment of high contaminant generating areas.

Healthy and Connected Waterways:

Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on the coast.

a) Volume of contaminants removed from the stormwater network via Auckland Councils maintenance and renewal programmes: 5,000 tons per annum for cess pit (from LTP)

b) Volume of contaminants removed from the stormwater network via Auckland Councils maintenance and renewal programmes: 10,000 tons per annum from de-silting ponds and wetlands (from LTP)

Effects on groundwater health

With respect to groundwater quality, as above in terms of priority area for contaminant management, with high use aquifers identified as priority receiving environments.

No regional priority areas have been identified in the Rodney Local Board area with respect to contaminants from the urban stormwater network. Any issues related to groundwater will be addressed through the general management of stormwater infrastructure, as outlined adjacent.

As above for contaminant management, as well as:

· Input into the development of Unitary Plan, advocating Water Sensitive Growth. This includes recharge of high use aquifers, peat soils and stream baseflow.

· Assist in the development and provision of guidance on Water Sensitive Design, as well as guidance on stormwater treatment and soakage design

Healthy and Connected Waterways:

Maintain and develop Council’s current and future public stormwater network to minimise adverse community, environmental and cultural effects on groundwater.

As above.

Effects on wastewater network

In Rodney, there is concern of the leakage from septic tanks. Stormwater unit is supporting other teams in Auckland Council who are addressing this matter.

In addition, priority will be given to areas that WaterCare are leading in terms of collaboration on infrastructure upgrades.

· Regularly meet with WaterCare to identify and design collaborative infrastructure upgrades.

· Notify building control where wastewater infiltration and cross connections have been identified within areas that do not have combined sewers.

· Increasing public awareness around the potential health risks associated with all flood waters, working with WaterCare and Civil Defence on this matter.

· Collaborate with other arms of Council on managing leakages from septic tanks.

Healthy and Connected Waterways:

Collaborate with Council departments and WaterCare that have a key role in delivering positive stormwater outcomes

Regularly work with WaterCare and other part of Council on wastewater matters.

Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee

05 October 2015

Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays – Stormwater Priorities Consultation

File No.: CP2015/20250

Purpose

1. To seek feedback from the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee on proposed priorities for stormwater management in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays area.

Executive Summary

2. Auckland Council is seeking feedback on priorities for stormwater management in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays consolidated receiving environment (CRE).

3. The following seven issues that require stormwater management have been identified in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE:

a) managing infrastructure and assets,

b) managing growth,

c) managing flooding (or the risk of flooding),

d) urban stream management,

e) contamination of the harbour and coastal inlets,

f) managing stormwater discharges to groundwater,

g) stormwater effects on the wastewater network.

4. A workshop was held with the Rodney Local Board on 17 August 2015 to discuss the relative importance of these priorities and how they should be best managed. Based on this workshop the board has provided draft feedback (shown in Attachment A).

5. It is requested that the local board approve this feedback and any further input they would like to provide. This feedback will inform the region wide Network Discharge Consent (NDC) for stormwater management that council is currently preparing.

6. A report outlining what the NDC will mean for stormwater management in the local board area is also provided on this agenda for the board’s consideration and feedback.

Recommendations

That the Rodney Local Board Transport, Planning and Infrastructure Committee:

a) approve their feedback on the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays stormwater consultation process, as shown in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b) requests that the local board be provided an update on the outcomes of the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays stormwater consultation process.

Comments

Background

7. Auckland Council has sought feedback on priorities for stormwater management in a number of consolidated receiving environments (CRE) around the Auckland region, including the Waitematā Harbour, Greater Tāmaki and Manukau Harbour.

8. The Rodney Local Board was previously consulted in relation to the Waitematā Harbour CRE in 2013 and provided feedback on their priorities for stormwater management at that time.

9. Council is now seeking feedback from the local board on priorities for stormwater management in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE.

The Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE

10. The Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE is located on the east coast of the North Island of New Zealand, north of Auckland City, and covers a land catchment area of around 259.5 square kilometres^. The area includes Pupukemoana, the overflowing lake, known commonly as Lake Pupuke, as well as several sensitive estuaries; including Orewa, Okura and Weiti and three aquifers, Orewa and Whangaparāoa Waitemata Aquifer and Waiwera Geothermal Aquifer. A map of the CRE is below.

11. Effective stormwater management supports water quality outcomes. It is requested that the board comment on proposed stormwater priorities to ensure effective management of stormwater issues across Auckland, and in particular the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays areas.

Figure 1: Map of Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment

Network Discharge Consent (NDC)

12. This feedback will inform the priorities set within the region wide NDC for stormwater infrastructure that council is currently preparing.

13. This consent is currently being developed and council’s stormwater unit will soon lodge the application for the consent with the regulatory arm of council. The consent will give council authority under the Resource Management Act to allow the diversion and discharge of water from the urban public stormwater network. Once approved, it will guide council’s management of stormwater infrastructure over the next 35 years.

14. A workshop was held with the board to seek their feedback on the NDC on 20 April 2015. A report outlining what the NDC will mean for stormwater management in the board area is also provided on this agenda for the committee’s consideration and feedback.

Feedback sought

15. It is neither practically possible nor affordable to address all the effects of stormwater discharges, including existing effects, within the next 35 years (the length of a NDC). As such, consultation is being undertaken to support prioritisation of issues to best mitigate any effects from stormwater discharges. This consultation will also help stormwater align future work programmes to support local priorities.

16. The following issues that require stormwater management have been identified in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE:

a) managing infrastructure and assets,

b) managing growth,

c) managing flooding (or the risk of flooding),

d) urban stream management,

e) contamination of the harbour and coastal inlets,

f) managing stormwater discharges to groundwater,

g) stormwater effects on the wastewater network.

17. In relation to these priorities, local board members are asked to provide feedback in relation to two specific questions:

a) From the issues identified above, what do you think are the priorities for Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays?

b) What selection criteria should be used for managing stormwater priorities?

18. These priorities were discussed with the board at a workshop on 17 August 2015 to explain the purpose of the consultation to them and inform their submission. Based on this workshop the board has provided draft feedback (shown in Attachment A).

19. Two supporting documents are also appended to this report to support decision making around local priorities. These attachments are as follows:

a) The Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment: Stormwater Priorities Consultation - Information Brochure and Request for Feedback (Attachment B)

b) Frequently Asked Questions – includes a list of detailed responses to the frequently asked questions about the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE: Stormwater Priorities Consultation project (Attachment C).

20. A detailed technical report regarding the challenges of managing the stormwater draining throughout the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE is also available on request. It contains details regarding key issues within the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE, along with an explanation of the potential criteria for prioritisation (as shown in the tables associated with paragraphs 17 and 18 of this report).

Implications for and relevance to local boards

21. The issues and priorities under discussion that are of interest and concern to a wide range of stakeholders, and are likely to be of interest to the local board are:

– flooding of homes and businesses,

– erosion of streams,

– sedimentation of streams and estuaries, and

– contamination by pollutants of sensitive natural habitats, fish, shellfish, birdlife, marine mammals and other biota.

22. Council seeks to obtain feedback on the priorities for the management of these issues. In addition, feedback on the criteria which should be used to prioritise stormwater management within each issue is important to ensure that future works and projects are aligned with local board priorities, as identified through the local board plans.

23. Figure Two identifies how the consultation process will feed into informing council’s stormwater management activities. This comprises how each issue is regionally evaluated and prioritised in terms of the areas for further investigation. These prioritised areas will then be further investigated through a sub-catchment management planning programme or project.

Text Box: Figure Two: The relationship between the NDC, council policy and statutory documents. Orange circle highlights where results of consultation will be used.

Consultation to date

24. General consultation with key identified stakeholders within the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays catchment area (including internal Auckland Council staff, interested advisory panels, council-controlled organisations, government departments, environmental and recreational interest groups, community and business interest groups and the general public) is currently being undertaken via a series of consultation workshops. In total, 63 external stakeholders have been directly contacted and invited to participate in the consultation process. A list of stakeholders approached is attached as Attachment D.

25. Feedback received has been similar to that for the Waitemata Harbour, Greater Tamaki and Manukau Harbour CREs. Stakeholders have indicated that growth within the CRE needs to be carefully managed such as effects on the marine and freshwater environments, along with ensuring stormwater effects from growth, are the highest priorities. The period for providing feedback closed on 12 August 2015, and a full summary of the feedback is currently being collated.

Recommendation

26. It is recommended that the local board approve their draft feedback on priorities for stormwater management in the Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays CRE as shown in Attachment A, along with any other further points they may wish to add.

Consideration

Local Board views and implications

27. This report seeks feedback from the local board regarding their views on priorities for stormwater management. Feedback received from the consultation process will be summarised and will help to inform the setting of priorities for stormwater management.

28. The local boards located in this CRE include Rodney, Hibiscus and Bays, Kaipatiki and Devonport-Takapuna.

Māori impact statement

29. Feedback is also being sought from mana whenua. Consultation workshops were held in August 2015. Council conducts regular meetings with relevant iwi groups regarding stormwater management and follow-up with iwi regarding issues raised is ongoing.

Implementation

30. Three risks with respect to implementation of feedback from local boards have been identified. Firstly, it is noted that a wide range of stakeholders are being consulted. As a result, it is likely that there will be differing opinions with respect to stormwater management priorities. Secondly, there is a risk that there will be a lack of funding to implement all identified priorities. Thirdly, since the region-wide stormwater network discharge consent application will be going through a regulatory process under the Resource Management Act (1991) any outcomes may be open to challenge through this process.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Rodney Local Board Draft Feedback on Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment: Stormwater Priorities Consultation	69
b View	Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment: Stormwater Priorities Consultation - Information Brochure and Request for Feedback	73
c View	Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment: Stormwater Priorities Consultation - Frequently Asked Questions	97
d View	Hibiscus Coast and East Coast Bays Consolidated Receiving Environment - Stakeholders List	117

Signatories

Authors

Guia Nonoy - Relationship Advisor

Janet Kidd – Healthy Waterways Programme Lead

Authorisers

John Dragicevich - Manager Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	Phelan Pirrie
Deputy Chairperson	Steven Garner
Members	James Colville
	Warren Flaunty, QSM
	Thomas Grace
	Beth Houlbrooke
	John McLean
	Greg Sayers
	Brenda Steele

Authors	Raewyn Morrison - Local Board Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Relationship Manager