Agenda of Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 grant allocations

File No.: CP2019/15890

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 including multiboard applications.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received for Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 (Attachment B) including multiboard applications (Attachment C).

3. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board adopted the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Community Grants Programme 2019/2020 on 19 March 2019 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

4. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $248,130 for the 2019/2020 financial year.

5. Twenty-One applications were received for Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants, Round One 2019/2020, requesting a total of $136,685.80 and fifteen multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $82,681.93.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 listed in the following table:

b) Table One: Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 grant applications

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG2002-115	The Touch Compass Dance Trust Board	Arts and culture	Towards studio hire for rehearsals and the cost of three performers for Tatahi (The Beach) performance in October.	$6,050.00	Eligible
LG2002-122	Devonport Heritage 2017 Incorporated	Arts and culture, Historic Heritage	Towards the costs to edit films, venue hire and an advertisement for the event "Celebrate Our Heritage" on 21 November 2019.	$2,899.00	Eligible
LG2002-130	Devonport Community House Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the art tutor’s wages, materials, and marketing for the delivery of arts and craft classes for young people aged five to 14 years old.	$15,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-104	Garden to Table Trust	Community	Towards the programme coordinator's salary to deliver a food education programme to Milford School, Forrest Hill School, Belmont Intermediate, Rosmini School and Westlake Boys School.	$5,000.00	Ineligible as salary costs are an exclusion under the Devonport -Takapuna Grants Programme 2019/2020
LG2002-117	Dance Therapy NZ	Community	Towards the “Dance 4 Us” programme including venue hire, marketing, co-ordination. equipment, materials and programme administration from 13 February to 27 July 2020.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-118	Merge NZ Limited	Community	Towards the costs to develop resources and deliver a deaf culture workshop and a six-week New Zealand sign language course to students and teachers of Takapuna Normal Intermediate School.	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-119	Kids Safe with Dogs Charitable Trust	Community	Towards instructor fees, administration, and printing of activity booklets to deliver the "Kids Safe with Dogs" programme to local schools.	$9,575.00	Eligible
LG2002-120	Transformation Academy Trust	Community	Towards venue hire, stationery, resources, volunteer support, training and workshop costs for the period of 1 November 2019 to 31 October 2020 for the Youth Transformation Project.	$15,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-121	The Lake House Trust	Community	Towards the upgrade of wifi equipment, website development, purchase of five portable virtual reality units and five tablets.	$7,950.00	Eligible
LG2002-123	Ngātaringa Tennis Club Incorporated	Community	Towards the cost of band and bouncy castle hire and flagstaff advertising for the club's annual Christmas picnic on 15 December 2019.	$1,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-129	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the telecommunications cost from 1 October 2019 to 31 March 2020.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-133	Rotary Club of Milford Incorporated	Community	Towards the purchase of planters(pots) and plants for the "Milford Beautification Programme - Stage Two".	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2002-138	Devonport Business Association Incorporated	Community	Towards stage one of “Startline Devonport” to produce digital and printed branding collateral including the development of a logo and brand design artwork.	$5,800.00	Eligible
LG2002-131	The Centennial Park Bush Society Incorporated	Environment	Towards a plant pest control project at Campbells Bay School.	$3,197.00	Eligible
LG2002-101	45 Events Limited	Events	Towards the cost of managing the water safety of the ocean swim and stand-up paddle events.	$8,500.00	Eligible
LG2002-107	New Zealand Theatre Month Trust Board	Events	Towards the cost of hireage of the Takapuna Memorial Hall (wet weather alternative), sound system, artist fee, marketing and administration for "The End of the Golden Weather" performance to be held on 25 December 2019 at the Takapuna Beach Reserve.	$2,851.80	Eligible
LG2002-127	Devonport Folk Music Club Incorporated	Events	Towards the artist fee, sound, and advertising for the "Folk in the Park" event on 16 February 2020.	$3,200.00	Eligible
LG2002-136	Mariya Sadykova	Events	Towards the production costs of the Art Street Fair to be held on 16 November 2019 including the cost of advertising, event management, photography, brochure design and temporary fence hire.	$6,500.00	Eligible
LG2002-102	Forrest Hill Milford United Association Football Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the purchase of a dugout plus the wheels.	$10,863.00	Eligible
LG2002-103	Les Mills Takapuna Limited	Sport and recreation	Towards the council permit fee for fitness classes in a council park.	$300.00	Eligible
LG2002-112	Milford Tennis Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the construction of a new practice volley wall and a “Hot Shots” tennis area.	$15,000.00	Eligible
Total				$136,685.80

c) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Devonport-Takapuna Multiboard Round One 2019/2020, listed in Table Two:

Table Two: Devonport-Takapuna Multiboard Round One 2019/2020 grant applications

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB1920-153	The Operating Theatre Trust	Arts and culture	Towards 2,000 free show tickets and free transport for children from low decile schools in the local board area to attend the theatre production "Greedy Cat" by Joy Cowley.	$3,103.55	Eligible
MB1920-104	North Shore Centres of Mutual Aid Incorporated	Community	Towards a proportion of operational costs, excluding wages, for eight centres in the North Shore.	$10,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-116	CNSST Foundation (Chinese New Settlers Services Trust)	Community	Towards venue hire and purchase of a tablet to deliver a cultural cohesion programme "A Brighter Future For You" from 19 October 2019 to 30 June 2020.	$7,358.00	Eligible
MB1920-134	The Yes Disability Resource Centre Services Trust Board	Community	Towards the costs to create a "Disability Youth Advisory Group" for the North Shore, including catering, transport, coordination fees, two events and a training day.	$3,500.00	Eligible
MB1920-141	Royal New Zealand Foundation of The Blind Incorporated	Community	Towards the purchase of digital talking books for the Blind Foundation library.	$2,400.00	Eligible
MB1920-152	Mika Haka Foundation Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the cost of running the "YES Creative Hub" from 10 October 2019 to 10 October 2020, specifically the costs of rent (studio and office), public liability, utilities, and administration.	$4,897.00	Eligible
MB1920-170	Environmental Education for Resource Sustainability Trust	Environment	Towards the purchase of native plants from Te Whangai Trust and Gulf Trees and courier fees for delivering classroom bins, administration and office expenses for recycling for schools and preschools in the local board area.	$4,567.13	Eligible
MB1920-110	The Korean Society of Auckland Incorporated	Events	Towards the annual event costs for the Korean Day event on 14 March 2020.	$2,600.00	Eligible
MB1920-174	Japanese Society of Auckland Incorporated	Events	Towards the venue hire cost of ASB Showgrounds to host Japan Day 2020.	$1,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-102	Badminton North Harbour Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the upgrade of the court surface.	$11,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-142	Harbour Sport Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the transport, toilet, sound, waste management, event photography, temporary fencing and event timing costs to deliver the "Shore to Shore" 2020 event.	$6,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-159	United North Piha Lifeguard Service Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the costs of structural engineering, detailed design, project management and consent fees for the North Piha Lifeguard facility replacement project.	$1,750.00	Eligible
MB1920-169	Gymnastics Community Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards the purchase of landing mats and foam cubes for the foam landing pit.	$19,806.25	Eligible
MB1920-138	North Shore Womens Centre	Community	Towards wages for a community resource worker and a social work position to support women with high and complex needs at the North Shore Womens Centre.	$2,700.00	Ineligible as salary costs are an exclusion under the Devonport -Takapuna Grants Programme 2019/2020
MB1920-161	The Parkinson's New Zealand Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the salary of six Auckland Parkinson's community educators for the period of 1 October 2019 to 1 October 2020.	$2,000.00	Ineligible as salary costs are an exclusion under the Devonport -Takapuna Grants Programme 2019/2020
Total				$82,681.93

Horopaki

Context

6. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

7. The Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board adopted the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Community Grants Programme 2019/2020 on 19 March 2019 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

10. The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio, and community networks.

11. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $248,130 for the 2019/2020 financial year.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

13. The main focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage. Based on the main focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department, will provide input and advice.

14. The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

15. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

16. The board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states; ‘we will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time’.

17. A summary of each application received through Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants, Round One 2019/2020 and multi-board applications is provided in Attachment B and Attachment C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

18. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

19. Seven applicants applying to local grant round one, has indicated that their project targets Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

20. The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2018-2028 and local board agreements.

21. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $248,130 for the 2019/2020 financial year.

22. Twenty-One applications were received for Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants, Round One 2019/2020, requesting a total of $136,685.80 and fifteen multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $82,681.93.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24. Following the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board allocating funding for round one of the local grants and multiboard grants, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Grants Programme 2019/2020	17
b ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Grants Round One 2019/2020 applications	21
c ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Multiboard Grants Round One 2019/2020 applications	105

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Moumita Dutta - Community Grants Coordinator

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Shane King - Head of Service Support

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks Service Assessment

File No.: CP2019/15315

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the service assessment for Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area (refer to Attachment A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As part of the approved Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme 2018/2019, a service assessment was undertaken to identify parks in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area that could be improved through activation or park enhancements.

3. The service assessment will ensure that parks and open space are utilised to meet increased population density and to meet gaps where parks assets are currently lacking.

4. Recommendations to improve the existing parks provision were guided by the Open Space Policy 2016 and the Devonport-Takapuna Open Space Network Plan 2019 (draft).

5. The methodology of the service assessment was developed in two stages. The first used existing park asset data to map the extent and distribution across the local board area. The second identified a shortlist of seven parks that were visited and investigated. An indicative site arrangement for each park was developed which will provide the basis for community engagement.

6. Community engagement will confirm the indicative site arrangements and ensure the purpose of the parks are meeting the needs of the community.

7. Seven parks and reserves have been identified for further community engagement and investigation and design. The parks are:

· Balmain Reserve, Devonport;

· Quinton Park, Bayswater;

· Allenby Reserve, Narrow Neck;

· Taharoto Park, Takapuna;

· Anakiwa Reserve, Milford;

· Bryan Byrnes Reserve, Milford; and

· Linwood Reserve, Forrest Hill.

8. The study area was based on the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area. All local parks were assessed at a desktop level. Wider suburb context was provided along with how each park’s use was classified. For the purpose of the assessment, parks were categorised as being either ecological, passive recreation or had poor crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) values. If a park was deemed to have one of these functions it was not progressed.

9. The key network opportunities throughout Devonport-Takapuna are an increased provision in community recreation and physical fitness, addressing playspace gaps, providing seating to encourage people to visit and stay in parks, and providing more recreational opportunities for young people, particularly older teens.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) adopt the Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks service assessment (refer to Attachment A of the agenda report) as a framework for future development and detailed investigation, as funding becomes available.

Horopaki

Context

10. As part of the approved Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme 2018/2019, a service assessment was undertaken to identify parks within the local board area that could be activated or enhanced to meet the needs of local communities.

11. The service assessment document is strategically aligned to the following Auckland Council policy and guiding documents:

· Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2017;

· Devonport-Takapuna Greenways Plan 2015;

· Devonport-Takapuna Open Space Network Plan 2019 (draft);

· Auckland Plan;

· Open Space Provision Policy 2016;

· Parks and Open Space Strategic Action Plan 2013; and

· Devonport-Takapuna Play Provision Study 2018.

12. Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2017 outcome one: “quality parks, beaches and open spaces that everyone can enjoy”, highlights the importance that parks and open spaces provide for local communities currently and in the future with population growth.

13. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2017 identifies the key initiative to provide quality park and local path amenities that meet the community’s needs (e.g. signs, toilets, fitness equipment, playgrounds and bike racks).

14. The Devonport-Takapuna Open Space Network Plan 2019 (draft) will assist the local board to prioritise future investment in parks and open space by identifying priority projects. The four key moves are treasuring our natural and cultural areas, sport and recreation for the enjoyment of all, connecting and sharing open spaces and optimising and increasing utilisation.

15. The Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks service assessment has used the key network recommendations in the network plan to show how the four key moves can be met.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. The purpose of the service assessment was to assess existing parks asset provision across the network, combined with focusing parks improvements in the areas of future increased population density or where a lack of park assets has been identified.

17. A desktop review of all parks within the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area was undertaken to map all existing parks assets within these parks. 21 parks were visited and a further nine were assessed due to their proximity to other parks. Parks were then categorised as either development opportunity, ecological function, poor CPTED value or passive recreation.

18. Seven parks and reserves have been identified for further community engagement and investigation and design. The parks are:

· Balmain Reserve, Devonport;

· Quinton Park, Bayswater;

· Allenby Reserve, Narrow Neck;

· Taharoto Park, Takapuna;

· Anakiwa Reserve, Milford;

· Bryan Byrnes Reserve, Milford; and

· Linwood Reserve, Forrest Hill.

19. Future investment in these parks will provide a range of recreational outcomes, ranging from physical fitness provision, relieving visitor pressure from well-used nearby parks and addressing gaps in playspaces and providing opportunities for young people.

20. The service assessment mapped all Auckland Council managed activation events as well as third party providers. Pop up activation events can confirm community aspirations for their local parks. These events can confirm the community need prior to investment in parks assets.

21. The service assessment will provide the basis for community engagement, in particular with Asian communities in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area. The increase in Asian communities highlights the need to ensure that robust engagement takes place to understand their needs, and recreational preferences are catered for in a local parks context.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. Community Facilities staff have been engaged with on the recommendations of the service assessment and support the future delivery of parks enhancements.

23. The approved Community Facilities work programme 2019/2020, includes the project “Install fitness trails/ equipment” (Sharepoint ID 2674 Devonport-Takapuna). This project is to align with the Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks service assessment recommendations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24. Workshops were held with the local board on 4 December 2018, 4 June 2019 and 9 July 2019. Feedback was received on the draft service assessment and incorporated into the final draft.

25. Community engagement has been requested by the local board to understand how park users experience local parks. Community engagement will confirm if the current shortlist of parks are fit for purpose. Community engagement will be undertaken when funding is available to implement the parks enhancements in the service assessment. These projects highlighted in the service assessment should be considered as part of the 2020/2021 Community Facilities work programme.

26. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board have stated the importance of community engagement to understand how the shortlisted local parks are currently meeting community needs.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme was presented to the North-West area Mana Whenua Hui on 4 July 2018. Iwi have the option to express an interest in being involved in parks projects at this time and will remain a key stakeholder throughout the process.

28. The work undertaken in the Parks and Places Team Work Programme has been designed to enable meaningful engagement with iwi by outlining the potential project and how it will deliver on the outcomes identified in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan. The intention is to provide enough information for iwi to efficiently provide input into the direction of the project before the design process begins.

29. Projects identified in the assessment for investigation and design will be presented again to the North-western area Hui. Iwi will have the opportunity to express interest in the projects and indicate how they would like to be involved in the project.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. There is currently no funding allocated to progress the next stage of this service assessment, being investigation and design. Possible funding sources to initiate the investigation and design and delivery phases have been identified as Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI), renewals funding, growth funding, or external third-party sponsorship.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31. The project will not be able to progress to the investigation and design phase until there is funding available.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The service assessment document will provide Community Facilities staff with options and recommendations for detailed investigation and design once funding becomes available.

33. All available customer insights data will be monitored and reviewed by Park Services to inform the opportunities identified in this service assessment. Further community consultation will take place once there is funding available and each park option is a live project in the Community Facilities work programme.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Community Activation Opportunities for Local Parks Service Assessment	177

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

George McMahon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport September Report 2019	241

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Approval to publicly notify Auckland Council's intention to grant a licence to occupy to the Korean Garden Trust at Barry's Point Reserve, 37 Fred Thomas Drive, Takapuna

File No.: CP2019/16128

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant a licence to occupy to The Korean Garden Trust (the trust) at Barry’s Point Reserve, 37 Fred Thomas Drive, Takapuna.

2. The site will be developed to provide a garden for the benefit of the public including a veteran’s garden that will have a memorial stone as a focal point.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Korean Garden Trust has applied for a licence to occupy a part of Barry’s Point Reserve, 37 Fred Thomas Drive, Takapuna.

4. The underlying land is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve and is subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977. Any new licence to occupy the land must be publicly notified in accordance with the Act.

5. This report recommends that the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board approve the public notification of the proposal to grant a licence to occupy for approximately 14,239.55m2 on Barry’s Point Reserve to the Korean Garden Trust for a period of 10 years with one right of renewal for a further ten years

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) approve the public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant The Korean Garden Trust a licence to occupy 14,239.55m² (more or less) on Pt Harbour Bed A SO 69231 at Barry’s Point Reserve, 37 Fred Thomas Drive, Takapuna (refer to Attachment A of the agenda) on the following terms and conditions:

i) term – 10 years with one 10 year right of renewal.

ii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded.

b) note that all terms and conditions of the proposed licence to occupy would be in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977.

Horopaki

Context

6. This report considers a new licence to occupy to the Korean Garden Trust to govern occupation of land at Barry’s Point Reserve, R 37 Fred Thomas Drive, Takapuna.

7. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Barry’s Point Reserve

8. Barry’s Point Reserve is located at the northern end of Little Shoal Bay and covers an area of almost 19 hectares. In recent years 2.43 hectares was taken under the Public Works Act 1981 to provide for the Akoranga Bus Station and link road through the reserve.

9. Other activities on the reserve include the Lake House Art Centre, the Takapuna Golf Driving Range and the sport fields accessed from Fred Thomas Drive.

10. Most of the land comprising the reserve was reclaimed from the bay by refuse landfilling. Therefore, there are restrictions on the types of recreational and community uses that can occur on the site and on how the site is managed. However, these restrictions will not impact on the trust’s proposal.

Public notification and iwi engagement

11. The Barry’s Point Reserve Management Plan, that was adopted August 2006, does not contemplate the proposed Korean Gardens specifically. However, the development of the area is in accordance with objective 3.7 General Recreational and Community Use of the management plan which states that suitable developments would include feature gardens, sculptures, artistic structures and band rotunda. As the proposed development and grant of a licence to occupy is not contemplated in the reserve management plan, public notification is required under Section 73 (4) of the Reserves Act 1977.

12. Engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in land in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area is also required pursuant to section four of the Conservation Act 1987.

13. Public notices will be placed in the North Shore Times and on the Auckland Council website. Submitters are allowed one calendar month from the date of publication to make submissions or objections to the proposal. Iwi consultation will be carried out concurrently at an upcoming mana whenua forum.

The Korean Garden Trust

14. The Korean Garden Trust was formed in 2009 as a not-for-profit registered charitable trust. The trust was set up to develop and maintain a Korean Garden, for the benefit of the public, on land belonging council.

15. The purpose of the organisation is to arrange and participate in cultural projects designed to raise awareness and promote understanding of the Korean culture in Auckland.

Development stages and licence to occupy

16. The Korean Gardens will be a three-stage development. (refer to Attachment B of the agenda report), The proposed licence to occupy is intended to allow development to commence subject to the trust securing land owner approval from the local board.

17. Stage one of the development will involve the construction of the Veteran’s Garden which will include a war veteran’s park, garden walk and a memorial statue/stone monument. The timeframe to complete this is unknown at this point.

18. The Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 indicate that when a group wishes to develop council owned land with no fixed assets, a licence to occupy is appropriate. Whilst there are assets being built in the form of memorials there are no areas of exclusive occupation by the trust. The proposed licence to occupy will allow for all stages of the development. The recommended term recognises the scale of the development and gives sufficient time for completion.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. Parks, Sport and Recreation staff support the Korean Garden development at Barry’s Point Reserve in line with the approved resource consent (LUC60068027). The garden is contemplated in the approved refresh of the Barry’s Point Reserve Development Plan (2018). The garden is incorporated into the wider design of the reserve.

20. Auckland Council staff have assisted The Korean Garden Trust in the resource consenting process and will continue to support The Korean Garden Trust as it progresses the delivery of the garden.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board has delegated authority to approve public notification and to grant community leases and licences.

22. The proposed licence to occupy to the Korean Garden Trust is an item on the Community Lease Work Programme for 2019/2020 adopted on 18 June 2018 (resolution number DT/2019/107).

23. The recommendations in this report support the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2017 outcomes for:

· Quality parks, beaches and open spaces that everyone can enjoy

· A place of natural beauty and rich culture

· Our communities are empowered, engaged and inclusive

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. Engagement with iwi identified as having an interest in land in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area will be undertaken. This will involve a presentation at an upcoming mana whenua forum.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. The costs associated with public notification of the intention to grant a licence to occupy and any cost associated with the preparation of the lease document, will be borne by Auckland Council.

26. The trust will fund the development of the proposed Korean Garden through grants, community fundraising and donations received from various Korean societies across New Zealand.

27. As asset owner the trust will fund the maintenance of the garden.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. Should the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolve not to approve public notification about the proposed grant of a licence to occupy to The Korean Garden Trust, this decision may be considered as a lack of good faith as:

· the trust was established in 2009 to develop and maintain a Korean Garden

· the trust’s intentions were endorsed by the former North Shore City Council.

29. The Korean Gardens will attract visitors to the reserve. With the future development of the reserve, Auckland Council will investigate extending and improving the car parking to cater for users should the existing carpark be insufficient. This improvement will be undertaken to serve the whole reserve rather than individual occupant needs.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. Council staff will engage with iwi and place advertisements about the licence to occupy proposal in relevant newspapers and on council’s website.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Korean Gardens site plan - Barry's Point Reserve, Takapuna	249
b ⇩	Attachment B Korean Garden Master Plan - Staged Development	251

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Deepal Chand - Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Site Plan	261

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Land owner approval to operate a floating waterpark on Lake Pupuke

File No.: CP2019/17116

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek land owner approval from the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board to operate a floating waterpark on Lake Pupuke from Sylvan Park, Milford.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The applicant, director of Waterworld Limited, seeks land owner approval to operate a floating waterpark on Lake Pupuke, Milford.

3. The floating waterpark is an inflatable obstacle course that floats on the surface of Lake Pupuke.

4. The applicant is seeking approval to operate from 2 January to 30 January 2020, 9.00am to 7.00pm.

5. A six-day event was previously held in April 2019. No issues were identified by the event facilitator.

6. Sylvan Park is a classified recreation reserve under the Reserves Act 1977. The Lake Pupuke Reserve Management Plan (RMP) guides activities around Lake Pupuke. This activity is in line with the classification of the Reserves Act and the RMP.

7. Various internal specialists have been consulted and are in support of the proposal.

8. Staff therefore recommend that the local board approves the land owner approval to the application.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) approve the land owner approval application from Waterworld Limited, to operate a floating waterpark on Lake Pupuke between 9.00am and 7.00pm from 2 January to 30 January 2020.

Horopaki

Context

Proposal

9. The applicant, Waterworld Limited, is requesting land owner approval to operate a floating waterpark on Lake Pupuke (which forms part of Sylvan Park, Milford).

10. The floating waterpark is an inflatable obstacle course that floats on the surface of Lake Pupuke. Participants make their way running, jumping, climbing and sliding around the course during their session.

11. The applicant seeks to operate every day from 2 January to 30 January 2020, 9.00am to 7.00pm.

12. The applicant will operate from the area shown in Attachment A to the agenda report. Set up will be restricted to the hard stand area and any damage will be reinstated at the cost of the applicant. No part of the set up will be on the grassed areas.

13. The applicant held a six-day event (obtaining an event permit from council) in the same location from 16 April to 22 April 2019 and now wishes to apply for a longer period. Events in excess of 6 days require land owner approval from the local board and also require a resource consent that will consider factors such as noise and traffic generation. Images from the previous event are shown in Attachment A to the agenda report.

14. The applicant proposes a container to store electronics, lifejackets, safety equipment and first aid kit; low barrier fencing to contain customers during safety briefings; and a Waterworld branded gazebo to provide shelter to spectators and participants.

15. Rubbish bins and portable bathrooms will be made available for customers. The applicant is responsible for disposal and maintenance of these.

16. The inflatable course will be cleaned before setting up in the water so that no foreign aquatic parasites, plants or contaminants are brought to Lake Pupuke.

17. The only noise will be from people participating in the activity. No sound speakers or announcement systems will be used.

18. The applicant is in contact with the owner of Mad Loop Windsurfing, an existing operator on the lake who will be based on the adjacent site Together they confirmed the waterpark location would not infringe on Mad Loop’s catamaran access.

Land status

19. 17 Sylvan Park Avenue, Milford, known as Sylvan Park is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve under the Reserves Act 1977. Under section 17 of the Reserves Act 1977, recreation reserves are provided for outdoor and recreation activities. Being a recreational activity, staff consider the application to be consistent with the classification.

Health and safety

20. After hours security will be organised by the applicant. This will ensure there is no access at night.

21. Participants will be safety briefed before entering the waterpark and must pass a swimming test in a life jacket. All children are required to be accompanied by a supervising adult.

22. The waterpark will remain inflated for the whole time, however, it will be deflated if extreme weather is forecast. Where wind strengths and directions are unsafe to operate in, the duty manager will make a call to cease operations until the conditions become safe to reopen.

23. The applicant is required to comply with the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. The requirement for a health and safety plan will be a condition of operation if the land owner application is approved.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Specialist input

24. The Parks and Places Specialist was consulted and is supportive of the application.

25. The Senior Maintenance Delivery Coordinator (MDC) has been consulted and has no objection to the proposal.

26. The Event Facilitator reported no complaints from the previous event. They advised the event, including pack in and out, went very smoothly and the organiser was always very responsive to any requests from the Events team.

Traffic management

27. Prior to the previous event, local residents and board members had concerns about traffic management and parking. The applicants will be required to have a traffic management plan in place.

28. Parking on the grassed areas of the park and the access road will continue to be prohibited.

Lake Pupuke Reserve Management Plan (RMP)

29. The Lake Pupuke Reserve Management Plan (RMP) recognises that some commercial operators can enhance and encourage the recreational use and appreciation of the lake and lakeside reserves.

30. The RMP allows for events and sets out policies to ensure that the events do not unduly impact other recreational users of the resource or the amenity of the surrounding residential area. Policies include restricting vehicle access from grassed areas and access road, requiring collection of rubbish immediately after and for the implementation of traffic management plans during events of over 100 people.

31. Staff consider the proposed activity to meet the policies of the RMP as it is temporary and will encourage recreational use and appreciation of Lake Pupuke and Sylvan Park.

Options

32. The options available to the board are to support or decline the land owner application. If the board supports the application, this will enable the applicant to operate the floating waterpark from Sylvan Park. If the board declines the application, the applicant will have to find another location or not operate during the proposed period.

Proposed conditions

33. Conditions that will be placed on any land owner approval issued will include, but not be limited to:

· a health and safety plan

· a traffic management plan

· reinstatement of any damage to the park

· removal of any rubbish associated with the waterpark

· pre and post site inspection with the Maintenance Delivery Coordinator

· no equipment or parking on the grass or along the access way

· the inflatable waterpark must be clean before going in to the water so that no foreign aquatic parasites, plants or contaminants are brought to Lake Pupuke

· letter drop notifying residents that live on Sylvan Park Avenue and the waterfront residents between Sylvan Park and Henderson Park at least two weeks prior to set up.

Staff recommendation

34. Staff recommend the board approves the land owner approval to operate a floating waterpark from Sylvan Park for the following reasons:

· the activity is temporary

· a traffic management plan will be provided and implemented

· the activity will increase visitor numbers and further activate the park

· the application is supported by staff, aligns with the statutory classification of the land, and aligns with the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. The Planning Information Advisor confirmed that if the applicant wishes to undertake the activity for more than six consecutive days, it would trigger the requirement for resource consent. The management of event traffic would need to be addressed as part of the application and any traffic management plan would be assessed accordingly.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. The proposal aligns with Outcomes 1 and 4 of the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan: ‘Quality parks, beaches and open spaces that everyone can enjoy’ and ‘Our communities are empowered, engaged and inclusive’. The waterpark will be special and unique to the area and will reflect the area’s love for water sports while promoting physical activity.

37. It is acknowledged that the local board had concerns about traffic management prior to the April 2019 event. To address access and parking, a traffic management plan will be prepared and submitted to Community Facilities. Traffic management will also be addressed through the resource consent process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. There are no areas of significance to mana whenua or cultural heritage inventory sites in the area proposed to operate from. No iwi consultation has been undertaken by the applicant or the council as there are no readily identifiable impacts on Māori heritage and culture.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. There are no known financial implications to the board from this proposal. The applicant will be responsible for remediating any damage to the park.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Option 1: LOA declined
The applicant may not be able to find another suitable site to operate from, and the community will miss out on being able to take part in this special and unique activity.	The applicant has not applied for other sites in Auckland.	Moderate
Option 2: LOA issued
Increased traffic accessing the park and the carpark, parking on the grass, increased competition for on street parking, blocking residents driveways	If approved, the land owner approval letter will include conditions requiring a traffic management plan and limiting vehicle access to hard stand areas only.	Low
May interfere with existing activities on the lake	The applicant has consulted with the owner of Mad Loop Windsurfing and confirmed where they would not infringe on Catamaran access and will locate the waterpark accordingly	Low
Increased burden on facilities	The applicant will provide portable bathrooms and rubbish bins for customers	Low
Damage to the reserve	Pre and post start meetings with MDC. Set up only on hard surface. Any damages to be reinstated at cost of applicant	Low

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. If the local board approves the proposal, the applicant will be provided with a letter outlining conditions of approval.

41. If the application is declined, the applicant will be made aware of the decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Aerial location and photos from April 2019 event	269

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Alayna Fiatau - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Informal local board workshop views on the draft findings of the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 review

File No.: CP2019/16034

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide a summary to local boards of informal views presented at recent workshops on the draft findings of the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 review, and to provide an opportunity for any formal resolutions from local boards.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council is reviewing the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 as part of its required five-year statutory review.

3. In May 2019, staff circulated a draft findings report on the bylaw review to all local boards. Eighteen local boards requested individual workshops to ask staff questions and provide informal views on the draft findings. Staff conducted these workshops in June and July 2019.

4. The workshop discussions about the draft findings report included:

· animal nuisances occurring regionally and locally

· issues with some definitions in the bylaw

· requirements to provide identification for owned animals

· Auckland Council’s processes for managing animals

· current and suggested controls on specific animals, e.g. stock, bees, horses, and cats.

5. This report summarises the informal views provided at these workshops. These informal views will guide staff in developing and assessing options for managing animals in Auckland.

6. This report also gives local boards an opportunity to formalise any views before staff present findings and options to the Regulatory Committee in early 2020. Staff will seek direction from the committee at that time if the bylaw needs to be confirmed, amended, or revoked.

7. Local boards will have another opportunity to provide formal views when staff develop a statement of proposal following the Regulatory Committee’s recommendations.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) receive this report on informal workshop summary views from local boards on the draft findings of the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 review.

b) provide any formal views on the draft findings of the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 review.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Ture ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 (Animal Management Bylaw 2015) was adopted by the Governing Body on 30 April 2015.

9. The purpose of the bylaw is to provide for the ownership of animals in a way that:

· protects the public from nuisance

· maintains and promotes public health and safety

· minimises the potential for offensive behaviour in public places

· manages animals in public places.

10. To help achieve its purpose, the bylaw enables rules to be made on specific animals in separate controls (see Figure 1 below). The bylaw contains controls for:

· beekeeping in urban areas

· keeping stock in urban areas

· horse riding in a public place.

Figure 1 – Animal Management Bylaw 2015 framework

The bylaw does not address dogs

11. Dogs are managed through the Auckland Council Policy on Dogs 2019 and Dog Management Bylaw 2019. The Dog Control Act 1996 requires territorial authorities to adopt a dog management policy.

12. The bylaw regulates owners of any animal of the animal kingdom except humans and dogs.

The bylaw does not regulate animal welfare

13. The Local Government Act 2002 and Health Act 1956 under which the bylaw was created, provide powers to protect people from nuisance and harm, not animals.

14. Issues with predators eating protected wildlife or animals trampling natural fauna are addressed through other legislation such as the Animal Welfare Act 1999, Wildlife Act 1953 and Biosecurity Act 1993.

The bylaw must be reviewed to ensure it is still necessary and appropriate

15. Auckland Council must complete a statutory review of the bylaw by 30 April 2020 to prevent it from expiring.

16. Following the statutory review, the council can propose the bylaw be confirmed, amended, revoked or replaced using a public consultative procedure.

17. In May 2019, staff completed a draft findings report for the bylaw review. The draft report identified current issues with animal nuisance and potential areas of improvement for the bylaw.

Staff held local board workshops to obtain informal views on the draft findings report

18. In May 2019, staff provided a copy of the draft findings report to all local boards. Eighteen local boards requested workshops which were conducted in June and July 2019.

19. At these workshops, local boards provided informal views and asked questions on the draft findings report. These informal views will aid staff in producing a range of options to respond to identified animal nuisance and management issues.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

20. The following sections summarise informal local board views from the workshops collectively. The sections provide informal views on:

· ongoing animal nuisance issues

· the bylaw’s definition of ‘owner’

· the bylaw’s definition of ‘nuisance’

· exclusion rules for companion animals

· identifying owned animals

· the council’s processes for managing animals

· views on existing and new controls for specific animals.

21. The PowerPoint presented at the local board workshops is provided in Attachment A. The sub-sections below reference the relevant slide pages.

22. Questions from local boards at the workshops are provided in Attachment B. These questions will be further explored during the options analysis.

There are ongoing issues with animal nuisance (Slides 9-10)

23. At the workshops, staff presented known animal nuisances occurring regionally and locally. Previous engagement captured many types of nuisance, but local boards added and emphasised the nuisances listed below:

Table 1 - Local board informal views on animal nuisances

Bees	· Bees leaving excrement on cars is a minor nuisance. · Some people, especially those with bee allergies, are fearful of bees coming onto their property.
Birds	· Types of nuisance caused by birds is very subjective. · People are abandoning geese and ducks. · Breeding parrots is a nuisance. · Turkeys and peacocks are causing a nuisance in rural areas. · Feeding wild pigeons and seagulls is causing a nuisance.
Cats	· There are large numbers of stray cats across the region. · Cats breed in construction and development spaces. · Cats cause a nuisance by defecating in vegetable gardens. · Abandoned kittens become feral and cause nuisance. · Cats are eating native wildlife.
Pigs	· In urban areas, temporarily keeping pigs for fattening causes nuisance.
Rabbits	· Rabbit infestations on council land cause nuisance to neighbouring properties.
Roosters	· Roosters are a nuisance and can be vicious, harmful animals. · In rural areas, people are abandoning roosters. · Rural areas have a higher tolerance for roosters.
Stock	· In rural areas there are issues with fences deteriorating and stock escaping. · Loose chickens and wandering stock are a nuisance.
Vermin	· People complain about vermin and water rats in waterways, low tide or the deep bush. · Open composting could create issues with vermin. · Complaints about rats are increasing.

The bylaw’s definition of ‘owner’ needs to be reviewed (Slide 15)

24. The bylaw focuses on the responsibilities of owners of animals. It is unclear if someone who is providing for the needs of an animal, such as food or shelter, becomes responsible for that animal as their ‘owner’.

25. Most local boards view that the bylaw’s definition of ‘owner’ should be clearer.

Table 2 - Local Board informal views on the definition of ‘owner’

· Any animal, whether owned or unowned, should be addressed in the bylaw.

· The current definition is useful as it captures a broad scope of animal owners.

· The definition should elaborate on criteria for the phrase ‘under that person’s care’.

· Owner definition should include accountability for feeding wild animals but should:

o not punish volunteers who care for the animals’ wellbeing

o allow animal control officers to feed animals to trap them.

26. In response to questions from local boards at the workshops, staff note the following.

· The Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029 manages cats that are not microchipped or identified by a collar and that are on significant ecological areas.

· The Wildlife Act 1953 provides that a wild animal is the property of the Crown until it has been lawfully taken or killed. At that point, it becomes the property of the killer or trapper. This act specifically excludes some animals, such as cats, pigeons and rats, from being vested in the Crown.

· In areas of high conservation value or where there is serious threat, the council will undertake control of certain pest animals. In general, landowners and occupiers are primarily responsible for managing pests.

The bylaw’s definition of ‘nuisance’ needs to be reviewed (Slide 15)

27. The bylaw uses the Health Act 1956 definition of ‘nuisance’. This includes a person, animal thing, or circumstance causing unreasonable interference with the peace, comfort, or convenience of another person.

28. Local boards provided a mix of informal views on the definition of ‘nuisance’. Some local boards commented that the definition should have more specific criteria, while others said the bylaw should retain the current broad definition.

Table 3 - Local board informal views on the definition of ‘nuisance’

· The definition of nuisance in the Health Act 1956 is outdated.

· Having specific and measurable criteria for nuisance is good.

· The nuisance definition is difficult to enforce without some specific criteria.

· Intensification and tenancy laws allowing for pets will increase nuisance incidents, so the definition needs more specific criteria.

· Reporting animal nuisance can cause tension between neighbours. Specific criteria would be useful, so neighbours are not left to interpret nuisance on their own.

· A broader definition of nuisance fits with common law and covers more occurrences.

· There cannot be one definition of nuisance since there is no one definition of Aucklanders.

· The definition of nuisance in the bylaw should have both general and specific parts.

Incorporating companion animals into the bylaw needs to be reviewed (Slide 15)

29. Currently, the bylaw does not mention companion animals (pets). The bylaw manages animals equally unless they are stock, poultry or bees.

30. Some Aucklanders find it confusing that the bylaw does not specifically address companion animals. There is misunderstanding that stock animals which are kept as pets instead of food, such as pigs and goats, are not subject to the bylaw’s stock controls.

31. Local boards had mixed views about creating a definition for companion animals. Some viewed the rules should apply based on how the animal is kept. Other local boards said the rules should apply regardless if the animal is a pet.

Table 4 - Local board informal views on adding companion animals in the bylaw's definitions

Companion animals should have separate rules

· Some animals should be defined as companion animals in the bylaw.

· The bylaw should make exceptions if any animal is defined as stock but is a pet.

· Companion animals should be excluded from the bylaw rules.

o Goats are popular pets and can be good companions.

o Farm animals as pets can provide the same benefits as traditional pets.

Companion animals should not have separate rules

· Companion animals which are stock animals should still require the same licensing process as other stock animals.

· Companion animals should not have their own rules as some neighbours are not familiar or okay with stock animals being kept as pets.

· Having a specific definition increases complexity and introduces subjectivity. It should not matter what a person says about their animal.

· People should not be allowed to have livestock as pets in urban areas.

· An animal is an animal no matter how it is kept. Since the nuisance effects on neighbours are the same, there should be no distinctions.

32. In response to questions from local boards at the workshops, staff note that you cannot buy or take ownership of a pest animal. If you already own a pest animal, you can keep it, but you cannot abandon it, give it to a new owner, or allow the pest animal to breed. The Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029 classifies unowned cats as pests.

Requirements for identifying owned animals needs to be reviewed (Slide 17)

33. The bylaw does not require owners to provide their animal with identification.

34. The draft findings report revealed that requiring animal identification would facilitate addressing animal nuisance issues. Most local boards viewed animal identification as helpful but impractical.

Table 5 - Local board informal views on identifying owned animals

· If your animal is going to leave your property, it should be identified.

· Council should offer a form of assistance to identify your animal.

· Every farm animal should be tagged and named.

· Identifying animals would prevent people from feeding unowned animals.

· Identifying animals is useful but impractical.

· The council should collaborate with the National Animal Identification and Tracing database.

35. In response to questions from local boards at the workshops, staff note that provided there is a valid purpose, the council has power to regulate animal registration. Any requirement would need to match the size and scale of the issue and would need to show it would effectively reduce harm and nuisance to people.

There is uncertainty about the council’s processes for managing animals (Slide 17)

36. The draft findings report identified that some Aucklanders are unclear about the council’s processes and protocols for managing animals, especially unowned animals. This confusion reduces people’s willingness to report nuisance as they are unsure who is responsible. Only 2 per cent of surveyed respondents who experienced animal nuisance reported it to the council.

37. The draft findings report identified the bylaw could be strengthened by providing information about non-regulatory processes and protocols for managing animals, especially unowned animals. Most local boards viewed that the council’s processes could be clearer.

Table 6 - Local board informal views on council processes for managing animals

· The bylaw should be clear on what the council does and does not do regarding animal management.

· The council should clarify the process for reporting unowned animals causing nuisance.

· The bylaw’s animal management processes need to align with the Regional Pest Management Plan.

· The council should offer mediation services for disgruntled neighbours over animal nuisance.

38. In response to questions from local boards at the workshops, staff note the following:

· A property owner may trap and/or lawfully kill an animal on their property. It is a criminal offence to kill an owned animal or destroy the animal inhumanely.

· To prove a legal claim for damage to private property by an owned animal, the property owner would need to show that the owner of the animal had failed to take reasonable care to avoid the damage.

· Culling is managed by central government laws and regulations, rather than the Animal Management Bylaw 2015.

Views on existing controls for specific animals in the bylaw (Slide 22)

39. Around 90 per cent of surveyed Aucklanders said the current bylaw controls for bees, stock and horses were about right or had no view.

40. The draft findings report showed council compliance response officers would find limits to urban beehives and more specific requirements for chicken coop locations easier to enforce than the current bylaw controls.

41. Local boards had a mix of views. Some had views on needing more controls, and some had views to keep the controls the same or less.

Table 7 - Local board informal views on the current controls in the bylaw

Animal

Current control

Views on more control

Views on same or less control

Bees

· Any properties, urban or rural, can keep any number of bees.

· Beekeepers must manage the flight path and temperament of their bees.

· Beekeepers must ensure nuisance from their bees’ excrement is minimised, and the bees have a suitable water source on the premises.

· The council should restrict beekeeping if people have bee-sting allergies.

· Limit the number of beehives in an area to prevent colony competition.

· Increase awareness and visibility of who keeps bees in an area.

· Restrict beekeeping to rural areas.

· Restrict the number of beehives a person can have in urban areas.

· Restrict beehive ownership by size of property.

· There should be minimum training or qualification to own bees. You need experience.

· Amateur beekeepers should be treated differently to commercial beekeepers.

· Bees are not causing much nuisance, so there is no need for more regulation.

· We should be encouraging beekeeping. Should regulate rather than overregulate.

· Do not restrict bees to just rural areas.

· Bees should be unregulated.

· Would be concerned if licensing costs for beekeeping were introduced.

· Should be careful about restricting bees as they are important to the ecosystem.

Horses

· Local boards are able to set specific controls for horses for local parks and beaches.

· Horses are currently not allowed to be kept in urban areas without a licence from the council unless the premises is larger than 4000 square metres.

Horses are permitted in public spaces if:

· manure is removed

· consideration is taken to not intimidate or cause a nuisance for other public space users

· beach dune damage is minimised.

· The same access rules for dogs on beaches should be applied to horses.

· Do not prohibit horses on beaches but restrict them to off-peak times.

· Should lobby central government to include the same powers that protect native fauna and wildlife from dogs for horses.

· Horse owners should be responsible for removing manure. The bylaw should encourage accountability and consider that picking up manure is not always practical, e.g. on busy roads.

· Should be allowed to ride horses on berms.

· Horses should not be banned from roads. There are few places to ride.

· Increase communication and awareness of current controls to horse owners.

· Would rather have horses on the roads than scooters.

Stock

· Chickens, ducks, geese, pheasants and quail are the only stock animals currently permitted by the bylaw in urban areas without a licence from the council. Any other stock animal, including roosters, would require a licence from the council in urban areas unless the premises is larger than 4000 square metres.

· Stock in urban areas must also be restrained within the boundaries of the premises on which they are kept, and chicken coops must not cause a nuisance and must be regularly cleaned.

· In rural areas the above controls do not apply. Rural residents must ensure their animals do not cause a nuisance to any other person.

· Stock should not be kept in urban areas. This is also humane for the animal.

· There should be penalties for poor stock fencing by roads in rural areas.

· The bylaw needs a mechanism to deal with repeat ‘wandering stock’ offenders.

· The criteria for keeping goats and other herbivores should be defined by the amount of grassy area on the property.

· There should be restrictions on how far a chicken coop should be from the property boundary.

· Fewer chickens should be allowed in urban areas.

· Roosters should not be allowed in rural lifestyle blocks in urban areas.

· The current stock controls are adequate.

· Support allowing pheasants in urban areas.

· There are already legal consequences for not fencing your stock. The bylaw does not need to address.

· If you have a large property in an urban area, goats should be allowed.

· Make sure urban pet days are still allowed.

· It does not matter where the chicken coop sits on the property if it is cleaned regularly.

· There should not be a complete ban on roosters in urban areas.

Views on new controls for specific animals (Slide 23)

42. A quarter of surveyed Aucklanders (26 per cent) said the bylaw should introduce controls for other animals. Of those wanting controls for other animals, over half (57 per cent) wanted controls introduced for cats.

43. The draft findings report identified that council compliance officers and the SPCA support microchipping and registering of cats.

44. Local boards provided mixed views on introducing controls for new animals. The local boards agreed that any regulatory response would need to match the scale of the issue, be cost-effective, and have measurable effects on reducing nuisance.

Table 8 - Local board informal views on controls for cats and other animals

Informal local board views on controls for cats

Informal views on introducing controls for cats

· The bylaw should limit the number of cats a person can own.

o Should make sure extremes are restricted, such as having 30+ cats.

· The bylaw should require the de-sexing of cats.

o The council should work closely with the SPCA in this matter.

o Make it compulsory for cat owners.

· Local boards have varying support for requiring microchipping of cats including:

o full compulsory microchipping across the region

o limited microchipping only to cats living in eco-sensitive areas.

· The bylaw should have the same registration process for cats as the council has for dogs.

· There should be a curfew for cats.

· There should be controls to dissuade people from feeding stray cats as it reinforces the cats’ behaviour.

· Publish best practices for tourists with cats and other animals visiting Hauraki Gulf Islands.

· The council should restrict cats from wandering.

· The council should restrict certain cat breeds, like Bengals.

Informal views on not introducing controls for cats

· Cat registration is difficult and has failed before. Auckland Council already has difficulty registering and enforcing dogs.

· Rely on the Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029 guidelines.

· Cats naturally wander. Containing them would be cruel.

· The council should invest in substantial long-term public education regarding cats.

· If the council restricts caring for stray cats, it could create animal welfare issues.

· Controlling cats is too trivial for the council to get involved.

Informal local board views on controls for other animals

· Rules are needed to restrict feeding wild animals in public, especially birds.

· How many animals a person can own should be restricted by section size.

· There should be a higher management expectation on animal owners in urban areas.

· The bylaw should address the health risks that animals can cause their owners.

· There should be a complete ban on snakes and ferrets.

· Rabbits are a major pest, especially in urban areas. The bylaw should restrict breeding.

· There should be controls on keeping birds in small cages.

· Unless there is a significant problem, neighbours should sort out their own problems.

45. In response to questions from local boards at the workshops, staff note the following:

· Any costs for managing stray cats would be investigated during the options development phase to respond to nuisance issues.

· The Local Government Act 2002 would give the council power to impose a curfew on cats if it was an appropriate response to the scale of the nuisance and would clearly show how the curfew would reduce harm and nuisance to humans.

· The council currently has more legal power to respond to dog nuisance than cat nuisance. The Dog Control Act 1996 gives the council wide-varying powers to address dog issues. There is no similar legislation for cats.

· Rat pest control is addressed through the Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029.

· The Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029 lists some tropical animals that can be treated as pests. These include eastern water dragons, Indian ring-necked parakeets, and snake-necked turtles.

· Chickens were not classified as pests in the Regional Pest Management Plan 2019-2029. The purpose of the plan is to protect the Auckland region’s important biodiversity assets. There are no significant biodiversity benefits to managing feral chickens at a regional level. Feral chickens are primarily a human nuisance issue centred in the urban areas where people feed them.

Other views from local boards

Rights of property owners and protection

46. The bylaw does not explain what options property owners have to handle animal nuisance on their property themselves. It is unclear which animals property owners are allowed to trap and dispose of on their own and which animals are protected.

47. Some local boards said the bylaw should clarify property owners’ rights.

Enforcement

48. Some local boards said the council should be prepared to enforce any rules it may introduce.

49. The Local Government Act 2002 does not give the power to issue an infringement notice under a bylaw. Compliance officers have said this inhibits their ability to address nuisance issues as, after trying to elicit voluntary compliance, the next step is prosecution. This can be costly to the council.

50. Some local boards provided views that the Local Government Act 2002 should be amended to allow for infringement fines. Some local boards viewed that the bylaw would already be fit for purpose if it could be enforced with infringements.

Education

51. Most local boards said the council needs to increase education and awareness about the current animal management rules. Some local boards viewed that the council should focus more on informing Aucklanders of responsible animal management than increasing regulation.

52. Some local boards also advised that any changes to the bylaw, if required, would need to have a strong communication and awareness plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

53. The bylaw affects the operation of council units involved in animal management. These include biosecurity, animal management and compliance response officers. Staff held face-to-face meetings and a workshop with council officers. These views were provided in the draft findings report and workshops.

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

Local impacts and local board views

54. Staff captured informal local board views through cluster workshops in March 2019. The draft findings report was shared with all local boards in May 2019, and staff attended individual local board workshops through June and July 2019.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55. Staff sought views from mana whenua at the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Forum in April 2019. The members present at the hui sought clarity that the bylaw’s reference of ‘public places’ does not extend to papakāinga (communal Māori land).

56. Members were also concerned with threats to estuaries, beaches, and waterways from unregulated coastal horse trails. These views were provided in the draft findings report and options development will consider these views.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

57. The cost of the bylaw review and implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. There is a risk that the public may perceive this report as formal local board views or an attempt to regulate cats without public engagement. This risk can be mitigated by replying to any emerging media or public concerns by saying that no additions or changes will be made to the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 without full public consultation.

59. Local boards will have an opportunity to provide formal resolutions on any changes proposed to the bylaw in early 2020 before a public consultative procedure.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

60. Following any additional formalised views from local boards, staff will generate and assess options to respond to identified animal nuisances. Staff will present these findings and options in a report to the relevant committee in the new council term in early 2020.

61. Staff will seek formal local board views when developing a statement of proposal once the committee gives direction on animal management.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Presentation at local board workshops on draft findings of the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 review	283
b ⇩	Local board questions from the workshops	307

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Maclean Grindell - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Kataraina Maki - GM - Community & Social Policy

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

17 September 2019

Temporary arrangements for urgent decisions and staff delegations during the election period
File No.: CP2019/17082

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval for temporary arrangements during the election period for:

· urgent decisions

· decisions made by staff under delegated authority from the local board that require consultation with local board members under delegation protocols.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Between the last local board business meeting of the current electoral term and the first business meeting of the new term, decisions may be needed on urgent matters or routine business as usual that cannot wait until the incoming local board’s first business meeting in the new electoral term.

3. Current elected members remain in office until the new members’ term of office commences, which is the day after the declaration of election results. The declaration will be publicly notified on 21 October 2019, with the term of office of current members ending and the term of office of new members commencing on 22 October 2019. The new members cannot act as members of the local board until they have made their statutory declaration at the inaugural local board meeting.

4. As for each of the previous terms, temporary arrangements are needed for urgent decisions of the local board and decisions made by staff under existing delegated authority.

5. All local boards have made a general delegation to the Chief Executive, subject to a requirement to comply with delegation protocols approved by the local board which require, amongst other matters, staff to consult with local board portfolio holders on certain matters. Where there is no nominated portfolio holder, staff should consult with the chairperson. After the election, there will be no local board portfolio holders or chairpersons to consult until new arrangements are made in the new term.

6. As a temporary measure, approval is sought from the local board to allow staff to continue to process business as usual decisions that cannot wait until the local board’s first business meeting, without consulting with the nominated portfolio holder or local board chairperson. Staff will consult with the local board chairperson following the inaugural meeting until new arrangements are made at the first business meeting in the term.

7. Appointments made by the local board to external bodies will cease on the date of the election. New appointments will need to be made by the local board in the new term.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a) utilise the board’s existing urgent decision-making process between the final local board business meeting and the commencement of the term of office of new local board members] OR [delegate to the chairperson and deputy chairperson the power to make, on behalf of the local board, urgent decisions that may be needed between the final local board business meeting and the commencement of the term of office of new local board members].

b) note that from the commencement of the term of office of new local board members until the inaugural meeting of the incoming local board, urgent decision-making will be undertaken by the Chief Executive under existing delegations.

c) approve that staff, as a temporary measure, can make business as usual decisions under their existing delegated authority without requiring compliance with the requirement in the current delegation protocols to consult with the nominated portfolio holder (or chairperson where there is no portfolio holder in place), from 22 October 2019, noting that staff will consult with the chairperson following the inaugural meeting until new arrangements are made at the first business meeting in the new term.

d) note that existing appointments by the local board to external bodies will cease at the election and new appointments will need to be made by the local board in the new term.

Horopaki

Context

8. Current elected members remain in office until the new members’ term of office commences, which is the day after the declaration of election results (sections 115 and 116 Local Electoral Act 2001). The declaration will be publicly notified on 21 October 2019, with the term of office of current members ending and the term of office of new members commencing on 22 October 2019.

9. The new members cannot act as members of the local board until they have made their statutory declaration at the inaugural local board meeting (Clause 14 Schedule 7 Local Government Act 2002).

10. Following the last local board meeting of the current electoral term, decisions may be needed on urgent matters or routine business as usual that cannot wait until the incoming local board’s first business meeting in the new electoral term.

11. As with each of the previous electoral terms, temporary arrangements need to be made for:

· urgent decisions

· decisions made by staff under delegated authority from the local board that require consultation with local board members under delegation protocols.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Urgent decisions

12. Between the last business meeting and the declaration of results on 21 October 2019, current members are still in office and can make urgent decisions if delegated to do so. If the board does not have an existing urgent decision-making process already in place, it is recommended that the board delegate to the chairperson and deputy chairperson the power to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board during this period.

13. The urgent decision-making process enables the local board to make decisions where it is not practical to call the full board together. The Local Government Act 2002 provides for local boards to delegate to committees, sub-committees, members of the local board or Auckland Council staff, any of its responsibilities, duties and powers, with some specific exceptions. This legislation enables the urgent decision-making process.

14. All requests for an urgent decision will be supported by a memo stating the nature of the issue, reason for urgency and what decisions or resolutions are required.

15. Board members that have delegated responsibilities (for example, delegations to provide feedback on notified resource consents, notified plan changes and notices of requirement) may continue to exercise those delegations until their term of office ends on 22 October 2019 (or earlier if the delegation was specified to end earlier).

16. Between the declaration of results and the inaugural meeting, the current members are no longer in office, the new members cannot act until they give their statutory declaration, and new chairpersons and deputy chairpersons will not be in place. During this period, urgent decisions will be made by the Chief Executive under his existing delegated authority (which includes a financial cap).

Decisions made by staff under delegated authority

17. All local boards have made a delegation to the Chief Executive. The delegation is subject to a requirement to comply with delegation protocols approved by the local board. These delegation protocols require, amongst other things, staff to consult with nominated portfolio holders on certain issues. Where there is no nominated portfolio holder, staff consult with the local board chairperson.

18. The most common area requiring consultation is landowner consents relating to local parks. The portfolio holder can refer the matter to the local board for a decision.

19. Parks staff receive a large number of landowner consent requests each month that relate to local parks across Auckland. The majority of these need to be processed within 20 working days (or less), either in order to meet the applicant’s timeframes and provide good customer service, or to meet statutory timeframes associated with resource consents. Only a small number of landowner requests are referred by the portfolio holder to the local board for a decision.

20. Prior to the election, staff can continue to consult with portfolio holders as required by the delegation protocols (or chairperson where there is no portfolio holder). However, after the election, there will be no portfolio holders or chairpersons in place to consult with until new arrangements are made in the new term.

21. During this time, staff will need to continue to process routine business as usual matters, including routine requests from third parties for landowner approval such as commercial operator permits, temporary access requests and affected party approvals.

22. As a temporary measure, it is recommended that the local board allow staff to continue to process business as usual decisions that cannot wait until the local board’s first business meeting. This is irrespective of the requirements of the current delegation protocols to consult with the nominated portfolio holder on landowner consents. Staff will consult with the local board chairperson following the inaugural meeting until new arrangements are made at the first business meeting in the term.

Appointment to external bodies

23. Appointments made by the local board to external bodies will cease at the election, so local board members will not be able to attend meetings of their organisations as an Auckland Council representative from 22 October 2019 until new appointments are made in the new term. Staff will advise the affected external bodies accordingly.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The arrangements proposed in this report enable the council to process routine local matters during the election period. They apply only to local boards. The reduced political decision-making will be communicated to the wider council group.

25. The Governing Body has made its own arrangements to cover the election period, including delegating the power to make urgent decisions between the last Governing Body meeting of the term and the day the current term ends, to any two of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and a chairperson of a committee of the whole. From the commencement of the term of office of the new members until the Governing Body’s inaugural meeting, the Chief Executive will carry out decision-making under his current delegations.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. This is a report to all local boards that proposes arrangements to enable the council to process routine local matters during the election period. This will enable the council to meet timeframes and provide good customer service.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have specific implications for Māori, and the arrangements proposed in this report do not affect the Māori community differently to the rest of the community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The decisions sought in this report are procedural and there are no significant financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. There is a risk that unforeseen decisions will arise during this period, such as a decision that is politically significant or a decision that exceeds the Chief Executive’s financial delegations.

30. This risk has been mitigated by scheduling meetings as late possible in the current term and communicating to reporting staff that significant decisions should not be made during October 2019.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. The decision of the local board will be communicated to senior staff so that they are aware of the arrangements for the month of October 2019.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Anna Bray - Policy and Planning Manager - Local Boards

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Eric Perry - Relationship Manager

Chairperson	George Wood, CNZM
Deputy Chairperson	Dr Grant Gillon
Members	Mike Cohen, QSM, JP
	Jennifer McKenzie
	Jan O'Connor, QSM
	Mike Sheehy

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshop record - 06 August 2019	321
b ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshop record - 13 August 2019	323
c ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshop record - 27 August 2019	325
d ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshop record - 03 September 2019	327
e ⇩	Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshop record - 10 September 2019	329

Authors	Rhiannon Foulstone-Guinness - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Eric Perry - Relationship Manager