Agenda of Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee

I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee will be held on:

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

Wednesday, 27 March 2019

11.00am

Papakura Local Board Chambers
Level 1
Papakura Service Centre
35 Coles Crescent
Papakura

Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee

OPEN AGENDA

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson	Karen Wilson	Te Akitai Waiohua
Deputy Chairperson	Brent Catchpole	Papakura Local Board
Members	Bill McEntee	Papakura Local Board
	Felicity Auva’a	Papakura Local Board
	Gavin Anderson	Ngati Whanaunga
	Hon. George Hawkins, QSO	Papakura Local Board
	Gabriel Kirkwood	Ngai Tai ki Tamaki Trust
	Edith Tuhimata	Ngati Te Ata Waiohua
	Katrina Winn	Papakura Local Board
	Michael Turner	Papakura Local Board
	Ted Ngataki	Ngati Tamaoho
Alternate Members	Willy Brown	Ngati Te Ata Waiohua
	David Wilson	Te Akitai Waiohua
	Martin Te moni	Ngāti Whanaunga

(Quorum 3 members Papakura Local Board Members and 3 Iwi Representatives)

Paula Brooke

Democracy Advisor

20 March 2019

Contact Telephone: (09) 295 1331

Email: Paula.Brooke@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee

Terms of Reference

Members

Papakura Local Board: Brent Catchpole (Chairperson)

Felicity Auva’a (Deputy Chairperson)

Bill McEntee

Hon. George Hawkins

Michael Turner

Katrina Winn

Iwi Representatives:

Te Akitai Waiohua Karen Wilson

Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Gabriel Kirkwood

Ngāti Tamaoho Ted Ngataki

Ngāti Te Ata Edith Tuhimata

Ngāti Whanaunga Gavin Anderson

Alternate members:

Ngāti Tamaoho

Ngāti Te Ata Willy Brown

Te Akitai Waiohua David Wilson

Ngāti Whanaunga Martin Te Moni

Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

Where an iwi representative cannot attend a meeting, the alternate member for that iwi representative may attend the meeting on behalf of that iwi representative.

Background:

The Pukekiwiriki Paa Reserve Joint Management Plan (“the Plan”) was prepared by the former Papakura District Council and Te Roopu Kaitiaki o Papakura and contains long-term objectives and detailed implementation actions for the effective management of Pukekiwiriki Paa.

The Plan was adopted by Papakura District Council on 11 May 2010 following a public process which began in June 2008. The Plan was approved pursuant to the provisions of section 41(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 and to a delegation from the Minister of Conservation.

One of the Plan’s objectives is to ensure that mana whenua and council work together in partnership to manage the reserve. To give effect to this objective and implement the Plan, Papakura Local Board has established the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee, comprising representatives of the local board and mana whenua. The local board has delegated its Reserves Act powers and responsibilities for the Pukekiwiriki Paa reserve management to the joint management committee.

Purpose:

To implement the visions, principles, goals and objectives outlined in the Plan whilst recognising the integrity and policies of each party, and working together in the spirit of partnership. To exercise delegated powers under the Reserves Act 1977.

Goal:

To co-manage the Pukekiwiriki Paa Reserve according to the vision, principles and objectives of the Plan, in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977.

Chairperson and deputy chairperson:

The committee will appoint the chairperson and the deputy chairperson at the first meeting. The term of the chairperson and deputy chairperson will be up to one year, or until a new chairperson and the deputy chairperson is appointed (whichever is longer).

Decision making:

The committee will aspire to make all decisions by consensus.

Quorum:

Three iwi representatives (or alternates) and three local board representatives.

Meeting Frequency:

Meetings of the committee will be held twice a year unless otherwise resolved by the committee.

The committee will agree upon a meeting schedule at its first meeting.

Funding:

Auckland Council will be responsible for funding the implementation of the Reserve Management Plan and resourcing the committee to give effect to its decisions. Papakura Local Board will make annual provision for ongoing implementation, maintenance and management of the reserve within the capital and operating budgets allocated to local parks services.

Responsibilities:

The Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee has responsibility for the administration and management of the Pukekiwiriki Paa Historic Reserve, as outlined in the Pukekiwiriki Paa Reserve Management Plan/Ta Mahere Whakahaere o Pukekiwiriki.

The Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee is responsible for the iimplementation and monitoring of the Pukekiwiriki Paa Reserve Management Plan at a governance level. The Committee has the decision making authority regarding allocation of the Papakura Local Board budget for implementation of the Reserve Management Plan.

Powers may include, but are not limited to:

Determining the priorities for implementing the Pukekiwiriki Paa Reserve Management Plan
Managing the implementation actions of the Plan
Monitoring the progress of implementation of the Plan
Monitoring the effects of implementation on the land
Ensuring that maintenance resources and actions are targeted to meeting the objectives and implementation actions of the management plan
Ensuring that funding and resourcing for the reserve takes account of the specific and unique needs of the reserve as set out in the management plan
Viewing and treating the Paa, not just as a reserve, but as a significant taonga that requires particular care and joint expertise to manage
Setting a prescribed process for works to be carried out on the reserve, in accordance with Reserves Act requirements
Ensuring that maintenance is carried out in accordance with the Reserve Management Plan and that the Joint Management Committee agrees the levels of service for maintenance on the reserve, subject to any wider council standards
Ensuring that maintenance regimes for the Paa are developed from the Reserve Management Plan, subject to any wider council standards
Ensuring that actions identified in the Reserve Management Plan are carried out in the manner set out in the Plan, as resources permit
Review of the Joint Management Agreement adopted on 28 September 2010

Note: relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

Local Government Act 2002

Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009

Reserves Act 1977

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting held on Friday, 12 October 2018, as a true and correct record.

5 Petitions

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

6 Public Input

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

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

7 Local Board Input

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.

8 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.”

Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee

27 March 2019

Pukekiwiriki Paa Historic Reserve - General update

File No.: CP2019/03482

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee with a general update on the management of the Pā.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. Careful maintenance has been the prime focus for Pukekiwiriki Pā operational management over the last five months.

3. Tree works will occur in early March to address health and safety concerns but no other notable activities have occurred.

4. Ecological work is due to commence again and will be the operational management focus for the coming months.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendations

That the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee:

a) receive the report.

Horopaki / Context

5. Over the course of 2018, significant progress was made in inducting all operational staff onto the site, assessing and agreeing to ecological and tree management works and undertaking the first substantive weed control works. Since the October meeting the Pā has continued to be maintained with care but overall there has been less operational activity.

Events

6. Auckland Council has had no enquiries for events and therefore no events have been permitted over the last six months. There are no forward bookings either.

Ecological management

7. Wildlands undertook the first stage of weed control in 2018. They have been unable to get back there but have been asked to do so over the following four months.

8. There is now is a lot of Japanese honeysuckle taking over the edge areas where gorse was removed and that the ditch is yielding juvenile privet and ginger which needs further control. We are also working on a proposal for management of all weeds on the whole site over a longer period of time in line with the previous ecological assessment and the agreed above ground cut and paint methodology and without the use of foliar sprays.

Other visitor activity

9. A user of the Pā has approached Council, via facebook, to see if they can help with managing the weeds on Pukekiwiriki Pā. Community members have approached Council from time to time with the same request. The committee’s interest in enabling and supporting a volunteer group to be developed would be welcome. The site is geographically challenging and the cultural significance is high so any activity would need to be under strict supervision but, noting the spray free policy, ongoing volunteer help with some weed management would be a welcome addition.

Health and Safety

10. There have been no incidents/reported near misses at the Pa in terms of Health and Safety. Maintenance continues to be carried out in terms of mowing, litter removal and weed control, with particular care being taken around the pit areas.

11. In 2018 it was agreed that an induction document would be commissioned from mana whenua, which could be universally used for any of the groups noted above. This hasn’t managed to progress but is still in the work programme and is intended to include:

· History/values

· How to respect the site

· Wahi tapu - what not to do

· What can be done to add value.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

12. The Papakura Local Board is aware of the disrepair and safety issues related to the entrance and track into Pukekiwiriki Paa, and continue to advocate for this matter to be resolved.

13. The Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee has been established to address these issues in a co-governance partnership between the local board and mana whenua.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

14. The Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee is a co-governance committee of Auckland Council including iwi and the Papakura Local Board. The role of this committee is to determine governance and operational decisions in the management of this site of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

15. Annual operational funding is available for maintenance, ecological works and design.

16. Capital funds have also been allocated for signage and entrance works. This is been progressed as a separate project and is the subject of a separate report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

17. The onsite risks have not changed. In relation to day to day operations the primary risk is management of the cliff edge. This continues to be managed by way of retention of a layer of vegetation. A longer term solution is the creation of a more carefully managed natural barrier, placed further away from the cliff edge, has been discussed on site and needs further discussion.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

18. As outlined in this report ecological restoration continues to be the focus of the operational management of the Pā.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Jane Aickin - Kaiwhakahaere Te Waka Tai-ranga-whenua
Authoriser	Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee

27 March 2019

Capital works update and approval for works

File No.: CP2019/03834

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Provide an update on the accessway upgrade, seek approval for the consent application and detailed design as well as the process for progressing the entranceway development.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The walkway upgrade project has progressed to the point where detailed design and an assessment of environmental affects has been developed and is presented for the committee approval.

3. Designs for an upgraded entranceway have not progressed due to a lack of input in relation to preferred designers. Options are presented to the Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee for progressing this work.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Pukekiwiriki Paa Joint Management Committee:

a) approve the assessment of environmental effects for the Pukekiwiriki Pā walkway upgrade.

b) approve Te Arawhata, being the walkway ballistrade concept, as attached.

c) provide direction on the process for reaching an agreed design for an upgraded entranceway to Pukekiwiriki Pā.

Horopaki

Context

4. At the 12 October 2018 meeting of the Pukekiwiriki Pā Management Committee (committee) a preliminary design for the track upgrade was approved “subject to Te Akitai Waiohua, Ngaaāti Whanaunga, Ngāi Tai ki Tamaki Trust, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua and Ngāti Tamaoho, reviewing and endorsing the track design from Red Hill Road to the Pā site, by the end of October 2018”.

5. In addition there were a number of other resolutions passed as detailed below:

d) request the use of hardwood decking timbers, providing they are sustainably sourced and meet the building code requirement for design life, noting that this is preferred over CCA treated pine

e) note the previous resolution (PUK/2018/3) still applies in regard to mana whenua on this committee being invited to undertake cultural monitoring

f) request that the assessment of effects (AEE) for the works, be submitted to mana whenua members and that mana whenua members of the committee be delegated authority to sign off the final AEE (via email – no meeting is required)

g) request the development of draft concept design options for an access gateway tohu or pou at the entrance to Pukekiwiriki Pā, based on the following requirements:

i. mana whenua be invited to provide the names of any suppliers that would be endorsed as suitable to provide cultural design options for the entrance

ii. officers seek offers of service from endorsed designers

iii. officers work with mana whenua representatives on this committee to assess the gateway, including artist impressions

iv. request that gateway, tohu or pou design options be reported back to the committee for consideration.

6. Following the committee resolution management sent an email on 17 October 2018 to those mana whenua who are represented on the committee. This email captured the resolutions of the committee and included an additional request as follows:

· “The draft track design… is intentionally kept quite simple. In line with the significance of this site to mana whenua staff were wondering if consideration could be given to a cultural design element being incorporated into the handrail. This would need to be light (so the engineering of the structure and its impact on footings is not affected) and the cost of the project would need to remain within budget.”

7. The request to mana whenua to consider a cultural design element in the walkway design included reference to an exemplar from the Te Puru footbridge on the Maraetai-Beachlands Walkway. This project was led by Isthmus and was provided as an indication of the kind of thing that could be considered. Feedback was specifically sought on whether something like this should be part of the detailed design.

8. No feedback was received following the committee resolution and the 17 October email. A further email was sent on 23 November 2018 noting that no feedback had been received.

9. On 29 November 2018 Ngāti Te Ata provided some ideas for design from an already existing suite which Ngati Te Ata had developed for Maungawhau. This was sent with the intent of helping to gather ideas only. It included two seating options, one with palisade style backing, and a landscaping concept which used natural rock and pou. They also noted: “Palisading the stair case could add an authentic component, a small waharoa at the entrance, and seating sometime in the future would be conducive for the kaumatua and kuia to have a break - after coming up the walkway we get winded a bit going up there!”.

10. As no other feedback was received the detailed design has been progressed. Tika Creative/Reuben Kirkwood was approached to develop a concept for a cultural element to be added to the walkway and staircase with Te Puru footbridge and the feedback from Ngāti Te Ata as a guide.

11. Frame Group, who provided the concept and preliminary design, have since developed the detailed design and incorporated the request for hardwood timbers. The piles will need to remain in pine treated timber in order to meet the building code which states that timber in contact with the ground needs to ensure a 50 year life span and only treated timber has been proven to provide this. Tonka and Purple Heart timber (hardwoods proposed for use above ground only have a 25 year lifespan.

12. Tika Creative have provided the attached concept design which has been worked through with the project team including Frame Group (see Attachment A). Upon sign off from committee on the palisading concept design, Frame Group, can progress the detailed design process incorporating the requested palisading.

13. The potential entranceway upgrade including the potential for a waharoa has become stage two of the project in order not to hold up the walkway.

14. A draft AEE has also been developed, see Attachment B. This is based on the cultural values assessments received from all mana whenua, an arborist report and archaeology report. A Heritage NZ Authority is about to be lodged. Note: the draft AEE contains highlighted text in yellow that is subject to feedback. Text in green is a reference point to enable update before a final is issued.

Waharoa/entrance

15. At the October 2018 committee meeting the desire to progress an upgraded entranceway, off Red Hill Road, with the addition of a simple tohu or pou or waharoa (as signalled in the management plan) was discussed. It was resolved that mana whenua be invited to provide the names of suppliers to provide cultural design options, that offers of service be sought and that these be assessed. As no designers were put forward the entranceway part of the project has been separated out and options for progressing this are outlined below for the committee’s consideration.

16. As previously reported the Pukekiwiriki Pā Reserve Management Plan 2010 makes several references to signage. These include the need to keep signage to a minimum, to restrict signs to those signs that are required or are illustrative of the site’s history and the plan states that:

“Signs will be placed to explain why refuse and food inside the site is unacceptable, The eating of food and the deposition of rubbish on tapu sites is not practiced and signage to this effect will discourage ‘picnics’ and littering.” page 57.

17. The plan also notes that historical information related to the Pā should be prepared in Māori and English and historic photographs should be used where possible.

18. Under the management action of “new development and buildings” the management plan states:

“Any proposed buildings on the site must be integral to the purposes of the plan such as access, pou whenua, education, illustration and interpretation of the history of the site” the explanation for this section notes that “The only buildings that are envisaged by the plan are structures for access, signs, access gateway (Tohu and pou).”

19. Previous work programmes and reports to this committee have discussed the need for signage.

20. At the October 2017 hui it was resolved that “future proposed signage for Pukekiwiriki Pā Historical Reserve reflects strongly the no alcohol and smoke free status for this reserve”

21. Most mana whenua have considered the need for signage as part of their cultural values assessment and there are no objections to signage in principle.

22. Given the range of messages that need to be conveyed to address the points above, and noting the reference to an access gateway, tohu or pou in the management plan, it is recommended that a range of options for an entranceway feature be considered. These options should be commensurate with the significance of the site but also cognisant of the remote nature and smaller scale of the public accessible Pā area. In other words, the entrance should not give off the impression of destination with significant capacity.

23. Draft concept designs would also need to reference the recently received cultural values assessments.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Waharoa/entrance

24. There are two bodies of work that are needed in order to progress an upgraded entrance. The first is to determine the cultural message, scale and feel of the feature (scope) and the second is to select an appropriate design.

25. At the October Committee meeting it was proposed that these two components be dealt with simultaneously. To do this it was recommended that the designer/designers be asked to come up with some high level concepts for a range of options. On reflection this is difficult to achieve without some further direction from mana whenua in regards to the cultural intent or message that is appropriate in this location and also feedback from the committee on the scale and feel of the proposed entrance upgrade. There are also budget limitations that need to be built into the process. Being too open ended and asking for a range of options will risk paying for ideas that are not aligned with the desired outcome and driving too much cost into the project.

26. A workshop paper will be presented for discussion to help shape the scope of this work.

27. In addition to shaping the scope of the works the following options for selecting a designer are presented for the committee to consider:

a) Direct appointment – selection of a preferred designer at the outset

b) Select a small number of designers, that are deemed appropriately skilled, to provide high level concept designs and then select one designer to work with

c) Go to market seeking a designer. This would not involve paying for concepts as part of the tender process but designers would be required to outline the proposed methodology for design and provide experience/examples of work completed in the past. It is further recommended that a fixed price envelope for the design and build be included in this tender as the funding is limited and this will illuminate overly ambitious and unachievable tenders.

28. Direct appointment - if a trusted designer is able to be agreed by the committee then this option is recommended in this instance. With the limited budget and the number of considerations to be reflected in the design – in particular working with the designer to agree the appropriate cultural narrative – working with a single designer will reduce cost and simplify the process.

29. Option b) will build up front cost into the project but potentially help the committee with ideas and may help refine the scope of work before moving to work with a single designer. The risk with this is obtaining agreement on the small number of designers. If designers are not already a supplier to Auckland Council they will need to become one which includes meeting criteria such as health and safety pre-qualification. They can also partner with companies that are already suppliers to Auckland Council.

30. Option c) is recommended if a direct appointment is not agreed and if there is an agreed scope. If the scope is clear then the process is likely to result in a range of suppliers coming forth and without the design competition included upfront it will enable all of the budget to put towards the final design.

31. In all cases it is recommended that the project manager, a procurement representative and equal representation of mana whenua be part of the selection panel.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. Pukekiwiriki Pā is a site of significance to mana whenua that is a relatively remote open space with little impact is not intrinsically linked.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. The Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee has been established to address these issues in a co-governance partnership between the local board and mana whenua.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. The Pukekiwiriki Pā Joint Management Committee is a co-governance committee of Auckland Council including mana whenua and the Papakura Local Board. The role of this committee is to determine governance and key operational decisions in the management of this site of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. The total project budget is $385,000 ($100,000 in FY19/20 and $240,000 in FY20/21).

36. The entranceway upgrade is a stage two project to be completed from funding remaining from the initial track upgrade.

37. To date there have been $70,000 costs incurred in specialist advisors including consenting.

38. The forecast for the stage 1 track upgrade (including consenting fees, construction cost and contingency) is $180,000.

39. The total budget remaining for stage 2 – which is the entranceway including design, construction and contingency is likely to be in the vicinity of $135,000.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. The overarching risks identified in this report are associated with ensuring designs are aligned with mana whenua values. Options and processes are provided to ensure mana whenua feedback is provided at this point in time on the walkway design, the scope for the future entranceway upgrade and the process for progressing the entranceway design.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. Following approval of the walkway design and the AEE the resource consent will be lodged followed by building consent and tendering the project. Updates will be provided to the committee before works commence on the track and cultural monitoring will be agreed at that time.

42. Following the direction provided on the entranceway upgrade this will be progressed as advised.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Te Arawhata - Te Arawhata - walkway ballistrade concept	19
b ⇩	Draft Assessment of Effects on the Environment and Statutory Assessment (AEE)	21

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Jane Aickin - Kaiwhakahaere Te Waka Tai-ranga-whenua
Authoriser	Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation