I hereby give notice that a meeting of the Papakura Dogs Access Rules Hearing Panel will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 24 August 2016

9.30am

Local Board Chambers
Papakura Service Centre
35 Coles Crescent
Papakura

 

Papakura Local Board Dog Access

Rules Hearing Panel

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Bill McEntee

 

Deputy Chairperson

Michael Turner

 

Members

Stuart Britnell

 

 

Brent Catchpole

 

 

Graham Purdy

 

 

Katrina Winn

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Trish Wayper

Local Board Democracy Advisor

 

19 August 2016

 

Contact Telephone: (09) 295 1331

Email: Patricia.Wayper@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 

 


Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                        PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Hearing and deliberation report on proposed changes to local board access rules in the Papakura Local Board area                                                                                          7  

 

 


1          Welcome

 

The Chair will welcome everybody to the hearing.

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

 


Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Hearing and deliberation report on proposed changes to local board access rules in the Papakura Local Board area

 

File No.: CP2016/17883

 

  

 

Purpose

1.       To support the Papakura Local Board Dog Access Hearing Panel with the hearing and deliberation of submissions to proposed changes to local dog access rules in the Papakura Local Board area. 

Executive summary

2.       The Papakura Local Board Dog Access Hearing Panel (‘the Panel’) has been appointed to hear, deliberate and make decisions on submissions to proposed changes to local dog access rules in the Papakura Local Board area (resolution PPK/2016/91).    

3.       The proposed changes were adopted by the Papakura Local Board at its business meeting on the 18 May 2016 (resolution PPK/2016/91). The public was invited to make submissions on the proposed changes on 10 June 2016. The submission period closed six weeks later on 17 July 2016. A total of 67 submissions were received and eight submitters indicated that they wished to be heard. 

4.       The key issue for the Panel concerns the proposed standard area (dogs under control on a leash) along Pahurehure Esplanade Reserve. This area is also known as the foreshore walkway around the Pahurehure Inlet from Wellington Park to the Southern Motorway boundary excluding area to the east of Gills Avenue. 

5.       The hearing and deliberation process requires the Panel to conduct public meetings to:

·        hear from the eight submitters who wish to speak to their submission

·        deliberate all matters raised in written and oral submissions

·        make decisions on changes to local dog access rules (including a commencement date) by adopting a decision report containing amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

·        request the governing body at its 29 September 2016 meeting to implement the decisions by amending the Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

6.         This report provides a summary of the submissions received and other relevant information to assist the Panel with the hearing and deliberation process

 

Recommendations

That the Papakura Local Board Dog Access Hearing Panel:

a)      in relation to proposed changes to local dog access rules contained in the document titled ‘Amendments to Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012 – Papakura Local Board May 2016’ (Attachment A)

i)        receive the submissions in Attachment C – Submissions.

ii)       hear the submitters who wish to speak in support of their submission.


Proposed changes to local dog access rules

7.       In 2012, local boards were delegated responsibility to review dog access rules for local parks, beaches and foreshore areas (resolution GB/2012/157). 

8.       Reviewing dog access rules requires a special consultative procedure under the Local Government Act 2002. This process requires:

·        the adoption of proposed changes to dog access rules (‘proposed changes’)

·        public notification of the proposed changes for submissions

·        public hearing, deliberation and decisions on the proposed changes.

9.       At its business meeting on 18 November 2015, the Papakura Local Board resolved to undertake a review of its local dog access rules in 2016 (resolution PPK/2015/203).

10.     Following a pre-consultation period to gather information and community views, the Papakura Local Board adopted proposed changes on the 18 May 2016 for public consultation (resolution PPK/2016/91).  

11.     The Papakura Local Board Dog Access Hearing Panel (‘the Panel’) was appointed to hear, deliberate and make decisions on submissions to the proposed changes (resolution PPK/2016/91).  

12.     The proposed changes include to:

·        prohibit dog access to 13 ecologically sensitive areas and seven other areas

·        retain eight of 11 dog friendly areas that will allow dog owners to exercise dogs without significant impact on other users

·        apply an under control on a leash rule to all other park, beach and foreshore areas, including three current dog friendly areas

·        remove existing ambiguous rules for picnic and fitness areas and rely on whichever dog access rule applies to the wider location.

13.     A full copy of the proposed changes are contained in Attachment A – Statement of Proposal. 

Public notification for submissions

14.     The public was notified of the proposed changes for their submission on 10 June 2016. The submission period closed six weeks later on 17 July 2016. The proposed changes were notified through:

·        notices to all registered dog owners with their dog registration reminder letters

·        a public notice in the New Zealand Herald on 10 June 2016

·        a public notice in the July edition of Our Auckland

·        a notice on the Auckland Council website

·        a notice in the June People’s Panel e-update

·        updates to local board registered stakeholders

·        notices to previous submitters on the 2012 dog access review, residing in the Papakura Local Board area. 

15.     All relevant documents including submission forms were posted on the council’s website and available through local libraries and service centres.


Hearing and deliberations process   

16.     The process to consider and decide on changes to local dog access rules is:

·        receive the submissions, including any late submissions

·        public hearing of any submitter who wishes to speak in support of their submission

·        public deliberation on the matters raised in written and oral submissions

·        decide on changes to local dog access rules (including a commencement date) by adopting a decision report containing amendments to the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2012

·        request the governing body at its 29 September 2016 meeting to implement the decision by amending the Auckland Council Dog Management Bylaw 2012.

17.     The statutory, policy and delegated requirements that the Panel needs to consider in hearing, deliberating and making decisions are detailed in Attachment A and include:

·        public safety and comfort, protecting wildlife, and the recreational needs of dogs and their owners

·        the region-wide standard for a summer time and season rule on beaches (if a time and season rule is proposed)

·        dog access rules need to be easy to understand (i.e. practical, enforceable and clear)

·        the views and evidence raised by submitters

·        the information used to develop the proposed changes (refer Attachment A).

18.     A deliberations worksheet is provided as Attachment B to assist the Panel in its deliberations.

Summary of submissions

19.     A total of 67 submissions were received with 191 submission points. Table 1 below summarises the submitter groups.

Table 1 Submitter groups to Papakura local dog access review

Submitter group

Number of submissions

Percentage of submissions

Dog owners

48

72%

Non dog owners

19

28%

Local residents

29

43%

Non-local residents

38

57%

Local dog owners

21

31%

Local non-dog owners

8

12%

 

20.     The submissions are summarised into topics aligned with proposed changes. Issues raised outside the scope of the proposed changes are summarised in submission topic 7.  For each topic, staff comments and other relevant information is provided where appropriate.

21.     All submissions are provided in Attachment C – Submissions.


Submission topic 1 – General commentary

22.     The Panel can consider the following general submission points about the proposal under any of the subsequent submission topics.

23.     A total of 11 submission points were received in relation to the overall proposal. Of these submission points five supported the proposal in its entirety, while six opposed the proposal in its entirety. Reasons for supporting the proposal included that it considered the protection of wildlife. Reasons for opposition included the availability of adequate exercise opportunities for dogs, support for responsible dog owners and rules being unfair and too restrictive.

24.     One submission point was received in support of the area types as proposed generally (not specific to a location). This was on the grounds of wildlife protection and the risks associated with dogs causing harm.

Submission topic 2 – Highly sensitive areas  

25.     Highly sensitive areas were identified as places where the mere presence of a dog can have a negative effect, for instance on bio-diversity.

26.     The proposal identified 20 highly-sensitive (dogs prohibited) areas within Table 5 of the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A).

27.     Thirteen of these areas comprise ecologically sensitive areas in the central part of Drury Creek at the mouths of the Whangapouri, Oira and Drury Creeks from which dogs are proposed to be prohibited:

·        Pahurehure Inlet Foreshore

·        Foreshore adjacent to Harbourside Drive Esplanade

·        Foreshore adjacent to Capriana Drive Esplanade

·        Foreshore adjacent to Paraekau Road Esplanade

·        Foreshore adjacent to Oakland Road Esplanade

·        Foreshore adjacent to Hayfield Way Esplanade

·        Keywella Drive foreshore

·         Pararekau Island/Road foreshore

·         Foreshore adjacent to Brylee Reserve

·         Foreshore adjacent to Conifer Grove Esplanade Reserve

·         Foreshore adjacent to Waimana Reserve

·         Foreshore adjacent to Wellington Park (also known as Longford Park)

·         Foreshore adjacent to Drury Esplanade Reserve

28.     The other seven areas prohibit dogs for public safety and comfort:

·        Pukekiwiriki Pa

·        Bruce Pulman Park

·        Southern Park (excluding five mitre strip along western boundary of Kirks Bush)

·         Village Green

·         Central Park

·         Drury Domain

·         Rollerson Park

29.     Currently dogs are prohibited or allowed under control on a leash in the areas proposed to be prohibited in the previous paragraph.

30.     A total of 19 submission points were received in relation to this topic and are summarised in Table 2.

31.    
The majority (12) of the 19 submission points were made about the Pahurehure Inlet foreshore area. This inlet is located between the northern side of the intertidal area of Wattle Downs and Gills Avenue to the east of the Southern Motorway boundary. Of these:

·        seven came from dog owners and five from non-dog owners

·        one non-local non-dog owner supported the proposal to protect wildlife and because of a higher risks of dogs causing harm in the area

·        six submitters want the area to be a standard area with dogs allowed under control on a leash

·        one submitter wants the area to be a dog-friendly area with dogs allowed under control off a leash

·        three submitters are in favour of less restrictive rules in the area

·        one submitter does not support the proposal.

32.     Reasons for opposition to the proposal included that responsible dog owners need more support, dog owners generally keep their dogs well under control, and the proposal is unfair and too restrictive on dog owners.

33.     Of the remaining submission points:

·        two were from dog owners about Bruce Pulman Park who want less restrictive rules. Reasons include to support responsible dog owners with adequate exercise opportunities for dogs, and because the area is quiet

·        two about the foreshore areas adjacent to Brylee and Waimana Reserves consider that standard (on a leash) dog access is adequate to protect birdlife

·        one wants Central Park identified as a standard (on a leash) area to allow family outings with dogs

·        one supports the proposal on Keywella Drive Foreshore

·        one wants the foreshore adjacent to Wellington Park to be a standard (on a leash) area.

Table 2 Summary of decisions sought to highly sensitive area proposals

Location

Submission Points

Decision sought

Total Sub Points

Total Dog Owner

Total Non-Dog Owner

Highly Sensitive area

High use area

Standard area

Dog friendly area

Do not support

More restrictive

Less restrictive

Support proposal

Central Park

1

1

1

Keywella Drive Foreshore

1

1

1

Bruce Pullman Park

2

2

2

Pahurehure Inlet Foreshore

12

7

5

6

1

1

3

1

Foreshore Adjacent to Brylee Reserve

1

1

1

Foreshore Adjacent to Waimana Reserve

1

1

1

Foreshore Adjacent to Wellington Park

1

1

1

 

Staff comments

34.     No staff comments.

Submission topic 3 – High use areas  

35.     A high use area is a place that attracts a lot of people at certain times of the day or year. When there are a lot of people, dogs can affect public safety and comfort so dogs should be prohibited or under control on a leash. At low use times, it may be appropriate to allow dogs under control on or off a leash to meet their recreational needs.

36.     The proposal did not identify any high use areas, but did propose a time and season rule should any high use areas be identified through public consultation (see Table 3 below).

37.     Currently there is no time and season rule in the Papakura Local Board area.

38.     The panel only need consider the following submission points about the proposed time and season rule if it identifies a specific location as a high use area. 

39.     A total of 62 submission points were received in relation to high use areas. Of these:

·        35 were from local residents and 27 from visitors

·        33 were regarding the proposed summer season rule

·        25 were regarding the proposed winter season rule

·        Two submitters opposed the proposal.

40.     A summary of specific submission points on the proposed time and season rule is provided in Attachment D – Time and season rule submissions.

Table 3: Proposed time and season rule

Summer (Labour Weekend until 31 March)

Before 10am

10am to 7pm

After 7pm

Under control off a leash

Prohibited

Under control off a leash

Winter (1 April until Friday before Labour Weekend)

Before 10am

10am to 4pm

After 4pm

Under control off a leash

Under control on a leash

Under control off a leash

 

Staff comments

41.     No staff comments.

Submission topic 4 – Dog friendly areas

42.     A dog friendly area is a place that is suitable for dogs to run and play off a leash. These places may have lower use by non-dog owners, or be large enough to share without significant impact on others.

43.     It is proposed that dogs be allowed under control off a leash at any time in the following dog friendly areas:

·        Brylee Reserve (North East area)

·        Boundary Road Reserve (situated to the east of Lipton Grove)

·        The Children’s Forest

·        Jack Farrel park

·        Walter Strevens Reserve (south of car park to Pine Tree Point)

·        The land immediately adjoining the eastern boundary of the Ngakoroa Stream extending from Bremner road to state Highway 22

·        The Red Hill Scenic Reserve – scenic reserve situated between Red Hill Road and Hays stream

·        The reserve situated along the southern edge of the Papakura stream extending from the Southern Motorway to Porchester Road.

44.     Currently dogs are allowed under control off a leash in all of the above areas. It is noted here that submission points about Pahurehure Esplanade Reserve and Wellington Park (two other current dog friendly areas) are summarised in Submission topic 5 – standard area.

45.     A total of two submission points were received in relation to this topic and are summarised in Table 4 and in the following paragraphs.

46.     Brylee Reserve (North East area) received one submission point from a non-dog owner who wants the area to be a highly sensitive area to protect wildlife and wetlands.

Walter Strevens Reserve (South of car park to Pine Tree Point) received one submission point from a non-dog owner who wants the area to be a dog friendly area as dogs need adequate exercise opportunities.


Table 4: Summary of decisions sought to dog friendly area proposals

Location

Submission Points

Decision sought

Total Sub Points

Total Dog Owner

Total Non-Dog Owner

Highly Sensitive area

High use area

Standard area

Dog friendly area

Do not support

More restrictive

Less restrictive

Support proposal

Brylee Reserve (North East Area)

1

1

1

Walter Strevens Reserve (South Of Car Park To Pine Tree Point)

1

1

1

 

Staff comments

47.     No staff comments.

Submission topic 5 – Standard area

48.     A standard area is a place that does not fall into any of the other three categories. These places may include:

·        Moderate or low use places that are not suitable for dogs to run and play off a leash

·        high use areas where the proposed time and season rule would not balance public safety and comfort and the needs of dogs and their owners

·        areas that allow for dogs to be included within family activities without interfering with other users.

49.     The proposal identified 16 areas as standard (under control on a leash) areas in Table 8 of the Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) which were not identified as highly sensitive, high use or dog friendly areas. 

50.     Currently, dogs are allowed under control on a leash in 13 of the areas identified in the previous paragraph, and allowed under control off a leash in 3 areas (Wellington Park, Pahurehure Eslanade Reserve, and Wharf Street Reserve).

51.     A total of 20 submission points related to this topic.  

52.     Six submission points were received concerning Pahurehure Esplanade Reserve (also known as the foreshore walkway around the Pahurehure Inlet from Wellington Park to the Southern motorway boundary excluding the area to the east of Gills Ave). Of these:

·        all are dog owners

·        four want the area to be dog friendly. Reasons include:

o   owners generally keep their dogs under control

o   rules are unfair and restrictive on dog owners

o   dogs help improve owners’ health and fitness

o   the location is quiet.

·        one wants the area to be less restrictive

·        one supports the proposal for wildlife protection, because dogs fight, and because owners do not try or fail to control their dogs, and do not clean up after dogs. 

53.     Wellington Park received two submission points, both from dog owners.

·        one supports the proposal because the area is not suitable to walk a dog

·        one wants the area to be dog friendly as there are not enough areas for dog exercise activities. Other reasons include that dog owners generally keep their dogs well under control, and that the proposed rules are unfair and too restrictive on dog owners.

54.     Of the remaining submission points:

·        eight support the proposal because owners do not clean up after dogs, interfere with belongings and picnics, try to take food, fight, owners are unable to control their dog, and wildlife must be protected

·        three want the rule less restrictive because dog owners generally keep their dogs well under control, and the proposed rules are unfair and too restrictive.

Staff comments

55.     No staff comments.

Submission topic 6 – Ambiguous dog access rules

56.     It is proposed to remove any ambiguous rules and rely on whichever dog access rule applies to the wider location.

57.     Currently the Papakura Local Board has specific rules that require dogs to be under control on a leash in any area that is developed or marked out as a picnic area or fitness apparatus area.

58.     No submission points were received in relation to this topic.

Staff comments

59.     No staff comments.

 

Submission topic 7– Other matters

60.     A total of 14 submission points were received about matters out of scope from the proposal. A summary of the matters raised is shown in Table 5 below. The panel cannot make decisions on these matters but can make recommendations to the relevant authority.

Table 5: Summary of other matters raised

Other matter

Total submission points

Dog owner education

2

Improvement to the process

1

More dog parks

2

More rubbish bins

2

More/better enforcement

4

More/better signage

3

Staff comments

61.     The provision of facilities such as dog parks and rubbish bins is a matter for the local board as part of its management of local parks.

62.     Council’s Licensing and Compliance Services provide education and enforcement services.

63.     Signage will be improved as areas are reviewed or as part of parks maintenance.

 

 

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

aView

Statement of proposal

17

bView

Deliberations worksheet

53

cView

Submissions

55

dView

Time and season rule submissions

147

      

Signatories

Authors

Dmitry Mitenkov - Policy Analyst

Jasmin Kaur - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Rex Hewitt - Relationship Manager

 


Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Page_000010


Page_000011


Page_000012


Page_000013


Page_000014


Page_000015


Page_000016


Page_000017


Page_000018


Page_000019


Page_000020


Page_000021


Page_000022


Page_000023


Page_000024


Page_000025


Page_000026


Page_000027


Page_000028


Page_000029


Page_000030


Page_000031


Page_000032


Page_000033



Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Page_000034


Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Page_000001



Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005


Page_000006


Page_000007


Page_000008


Page_000009


Page_000010


Page_000011


Page_000012


Page_000013


Page_000014


Page_000015


Page_000016


Page_000017


Page_000018


Page_000019


Page_000020


Page_000021


Page_000022


Page_000023


Page_000024


Page_000025


Page_000026


Page_000027


Page_000028


Page_000029


Page_000030


Page_000031


Page_000032


Page_000033


Page_000034


Page_000035


Page_000036


Page_000037


Page_000038


Page_000039


Page_000040


Page_000041


Page_000042


Page_000043


Page_000044


Page_000045


Page_000046


Page_000047


Page_000048


Page_000049


Page_000050


Page_000051


Page_000052


Page_000053


Page_000054


Page_000055


Page_000056


Page_000057


Page_000058


Page_000059


Page_000060


Page_000061


Page_000062


Page_000063


Page_000064


Page_000065


Page_000066


Page_000067


Page_000068


Page_000069


Page_000070


Page_000071


Page_000072


Page_000073


Page_000074


Page_000075


Page_000076


Page_000077


Page_000078


Page_000079


Page_000080


Page_000081


Page_000082


Page_000083


Page_000084


Page_000085


Page_000086


Page_000087


Page_000088


Page_000089


Page_000090


Page_000091


Page_000092


Papakura Local Board

24 August 2016

 

 

Page_000001


Page_000002


Page_000003


Page_000004


Page_000005