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

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 minutes of the Ōrākei Local Board meeting, held on Monday, 18 May 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Ōrākei Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Deputation - Simon O’Connor MP - Achilles Point community concerns

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Simon O’Connor MP, will be in attendance to address the Board about criminal activity and anti-social behaviour issues raised by residents and visitors regarding Achilles Point, St Heliers Bay.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank Simon O’Connor MP for his attendance.

8.2 Deputation - David Robertson - Generation Zero Auckland

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. David Robertson will be in attendance to inform the Board about Generation Zero Auckland and the measures that the organisation would like to see in relation to social distancing and enabling walking and cycling along Tāmaki Drive.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank David Robertson for his attendance.

9 Public Forum

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum - Tim Larkin - Auckland Water Ski Club

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To deliver a presentation to the Board during the public forum segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Tim Larkin, President of the Auckland Water Ski Club will be in attendance to present to the Board on the Club’s lease and long term plans.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank Tim Larkin for his attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-

(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and

(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-

(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and

(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan - approval of scope and intention to prepare the plan

File No.: CP2020/05727

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse the scope and engagement approach for the Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan.

2. To approve public notification of the intention to prepare the plan.

3. To establish a political working group to oversee the development of the draft local parks management plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

4. The Ōrākei Local Board approved the development of the Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan (LPMP) (Resolution number OR/2019/104).

5. The LPMP will provide a policy framework to manage use, protection and development of the Ōrākei local parks network. It includes park land for which the local board has delegated decision-making, held under both the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

6. Open space is excluded from the scope of the plan where:

· it is not owned or managed by Auckland Council

· the local board does not have a decision-making role (e.g. regional parks, unformed legal road and drainage reserves)

· decision making about park land is shared with an adjoining local board, which is the case for Newmarket Park.

7. For unformed legal roads and drainage reserves that act as open space, the local board’s advocacy can be expressed through the plan.

8. The development of the LPMP will follow the process outlined in the Reserves Act 1977 (see Attachment A).

9. We are seeking approval to notify the intention to prepare a plan and to invite written suggestions, pursuant to section 41(5) of the Reserves Act.

10. The public notices are likely to be published in June 2020 and the deadline for written suggestions will be a minimum of one month later.

11. This report outlines the engagement approach for the development of the local parks management plan, including digital drop-in sessions to mitigate lack of face-to-face engagement due to COVID-19.

12. This report also recommends the local board establish a political working group and appoint members to this group. The political working group will receive regular project updates and provide informal feedback to staff to guide the development of the LPMP.

13. The costs of public notification will be met from the project budget.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) endorse the scope (Attachment B and C) and engagement approach (Attachment E) for development of the Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan

b) approve public notification of its intention to prepare a local parks management plan for all local parks and reserves in the Ōrākei Local Board area (excluding parts of Newmarket Park that are within the Ōrākei Local Board area) and invite written suggestions on the proposed plan

c) establish a political working group for the Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan and appoint members to this working group to:

i) receive regular project updates

ii) provide informal feedback to staff to guide development of the Ōrākei Local Parks Management Plan.

Horopaki

Context

Background information

14. In June 2019, the local board approved the development of a local parks management plan (LPMP) as part of the adoption of the Community Services work programme (Resolution number OR/2019/104).

15. This report covers the ‘what, why and how’ of preparing an LPMP and also seeks approval from the local board to initiate the first round of public consultation.

What is a local parks management plan?

16. The LPMP is a statutory document for land held under the Reserves Act 1977. Section 41(1) of the Act requires the council to create management plans for certain classifications of reserves. This also means that the council is legally bound to adhere to management plans.

17. The content of the LPMP (outlined in Attachment B) provides:

· a framework of high-level values and principles to guide objectives and policies that apply across all parks

· guidance on issues impacting key parks and at the park level to manage those issues

· overarching direction for leases and other activities requiring landowner approval for relevant parks.

Why do we need a local parks management plan?

18. LPMPs are an important tool to protect the values of parks while providing for appropriate activities. They provide a framework for consistent, transparent decision-making for managing and developing park land that guides the local board, council group, other organisations and the wider community.

19. The table below gives an overview of the benefits of LPMPs:

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

What park land is included in the LPMP?

20. The Ōrākei Local Board has decision making over approximately 125 parks and reserves, of which approximately 18 parks (or 14 per cent) are covered by existing reserve management plans. All of these reserve management plans are 10 years old or more.

21. The scope of the LPMP includes park land for which the local board has delegated decision-making authority, both under the Reserves Act 1977 or the LGA.

22. For unformed legal roads and drainage reserves that act as open space, the local board has an advocacy role which can be expressed through the LPMP.

23. A summary of the park land in scope of the LPMP is shown in the table below see Attachment C for more detail and specific examples):

In scope

Land for which the local board has allocated decision-making

ü land held under Reserves Act 1977

ü park land held under Local Government Act 2002

Advocacy role only

Land for which the local board does not have allocated decision-making, but that does fulfill an open space function

· legal roads and drainage reserves that have a significant open space function

Out of scope

Land for which the local board does not have allocated decision-making

û drainage reserves, roads (unless they have a significant open space function – see above)

û regional parks land

û park land owned and managed by other entities such as the Tupuna Maunga Authority

Local board boundary issue

24. This report draws the local board’s attention to a boundary issue with Newmarket Park as shown in Attachment D.

25. The park is primarily located within the Waitematā Local Board area; however small areas of the eastern part of the park are located within the Ōrākei Local Board area.

26. Staff recommend resolving this issue during future development of the Waitematā Local Board’s LPMP. In the meantime, the Newmarket Park Reserve Management Plan will remain operational.

Approval to notify the intention to prepare a local parks management plan

27. To develop a LPMP compliant with both the Reserves Act and the LGA, it is prudent to prepare the plan using the procedures for developing reserve management plans set out in the Reserves Act (Attachment A).

28. The process required under the Reserves Act includes two formal rounds of public consultation.

29. This report seeks approval for the first round of public consultation seeking feedback to inform the development of a draft plan.

30. Public notices are anticipated to be published in June 2020. The deadline for written suggestions will be at least one month after the notification date.

31. The second round of consultation will be undertaken once the draft LPMP has been prepared and approved for public consultation by the local board.

Tailored community engagement

32. We will undertake consultation beyond the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act, by providing different ways for key partners, stakeholders and the wider community to provide feedback.

33. Planned engagement activities include paper and online tools and the use of an innovative digital social mapping tool to capture comments and suggestions on individual parks (see Attachment E).

34. Staff are investigating digital drop-in sessions to mitigate the potential lack of face-to-face engagement if restrictions on public events and physical distancing requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic are still in force in June.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. The decisions in this report are largely administrative with low likelihood of direct impact on greenhouse gas emissions. However, the management direction set in the future LPMP, could emphasise the role of local parks in climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. The LPMP programme will seek input from council units and council-controlled organisations, including Parks Sports and Recreation, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Community Facilities (including Leasing), Community and Social Policy, Plans and Places (Heritage), Legal Services, Panuku Development Auckland, and Auckland Transport, amongst others.

37. We will work closely with council departments to draft the LPMP ensuring alignment with other council plans where possible, and that any direction provided in the LPMP on council’s activities on parks is understood.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Local impacts

38. The LPMP will give local residents and park users the opportunity to influence the direction for future park management and development.

Local board views

39. At a workshop in February 2020, the local board asked for detail on the benefits of the LPMP which are outlined in paragraph 19, and how the plan development timeframes could be reduced.

40. At a workshop in April 2020, the local board asked for assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of including parks with existing plans in scope of the LPMP, particularly whether scope could be limited to parks without existing plans in order to speed up the delivery of the LPMP.

41. Information about the number of parks in the local board area and the current state of existing Reserve Management Plans (RMPs) is provided in paragraph 20.

42. Attachment F lists the parks with existing RMPs to be included in the LPMP. If additional plans are discovered during research, advice will be provided to the local board for consideration as to whether they should be superceded.

43. The main benefit of superceding existing RMPs within the LPMP is to fulfil the requirement of the Reserves Act to keep RMPs under continuous review. It also ensures that plans reflect current community and mana whenua aspirations for these parks.

44. Attachment G provides an overview of parks within the local board area that have non-statutory plans, but not RMPs, and recommendations on their inclusion in the LPMP.

45. Staff recommend to include all parks without existing RMPs within the scope of the LPMP to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Reserves Act. Including these parks within the LPMP will also give an opportunity to resolve leasing issues which had been identified through the spatial plans.

46. Existing spatial plans, such as park specific masterplans and concept plans will not be superceded by the LPMP. The parks specific section of the LPMP can reflect the direction of approved spatial plans.

Establishing political working group

47. At the February 2020 workshop the local board expressed a desire to nominate some of its members to work with staff on plan development.

48. The purpose of the proposed political working group is to receive regular project updates, and to provide informal feedback to staff to guide development of the Ōrākei LPMP.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

49. The Reserves Act is one of the Acts in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. Section 4 of the Conservation Act contains an obligation to give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi (te Tiriti / the Treaty).

50. In performing functions and duties under the Reserves Act, like developing a reserve management plan, the local board must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti / the Treaty.

51. The principles of te Tiriti / the Treaty likely to be most relevant in making decisions on the Ōrākei LPMP and land status review work are:

· Partnership – mutual good faith and reasonableness

· Informed decision making – being well-informed of the mana whenua interests and views. Consultation is a means to achieve informed decision-making.

· Active protection – this involves the active protection of Māori interests retained under te Tiriti / the Treaty. It includes the promise to protect rangatiratanga and taonga.

52. The LGA contains obligations to Māori, including to facilitate Māori participation in council decision-making processes (sections 4; 14(1)(d); 81(1)(a)).

53. We introduced the LPMP programme at the Parks, Sport and Recreation Mana Whenua Forum in March 2020.

54. We will continue to work with all interested mana whenua in the development of the LPMP in order to:

· enable Te Ao Māori to be incorporated into the management of parks in the Ōrākei Local Board area

· provide an opportunity for mana whenua to express their kaitiaki role.

55. We will also seek feedback from mana whenua relating to the land status review prior to reporting to the local board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56. At its meeting on 6 June 2019 the Ōrākei Local Board adopted the Ōrākei Local Board Agreement 2019 (Resolution number OR/2019/97) which included the key initiative to develop an omnibus Ōrākei LPMP.

57. The cost for public notification and engagement are covered by the project budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. We undertook a risk assessment as part of the planning for the development of the LPMP. The following table outlines relevant risks and mitigations.

IF <event>

THEN <impact>

Possible mitigations

If the community are having to engage with council over multiple topics.

Then they may not provide feedback on how they would like parks in their area managed in the future. This means that the LPMP may not accurately reflect community aspirations.

· Use multiple engagement channels to reach those who don’t normally take up the opportunity to engage.

· Review results of engagement activities that have been undertaken recently to see if feedback has been given that is relevant for the development of the LPMP.

· Align with other engagement activity where possible to make it easy for the community to participate.

If the COVID-19 pandemic and impact of the lockdown on individuals takes their attention away from engaging in council processes.

Then people may be less inclined or miss the opportunity to provide feedback on how they would like parks in their area managed in the future. This means that the LPMP may not accurately reflect community aspirations.

· Work with the local board communications and engagement staff to create awareness of the consultation.

· Make it as easy as possible for people to provide feedback by offering different ways to do this e.g. paper, online, email.

59. If development of the LPMP needs reprioritising at a later date because of changing resource capacity for work programmes an alternate timeline will be presented for consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

60. The high-level timeline including key project and consultation milestones, and local board decision-making is outlined in Attachment C to this report.

61. The next steps in development of the LPMP are:

· commence targeted engagement with key stakeholders

· publicly notify the intention to prepare the management plan for at least one month starting in June 2020

· continue to engage with mana whenua

· continue working on the land status review of all park and reserve land.

62. Suggestions from the first round of consultation will be given full consideration in preparing the draft plan.

63. The draft plan will be available for public consultation in early-2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	How the local parks management plans will be developed	17
b ⇩	General content in scope of the local parks management plan	19
c ⇩	Park land generally in scope of the local parks management plan	21
d ⇩	Newmarket Park boundary issue	23
e ⇩	Engagement approaches	25
f ⇩	Parks with existing RMPs to be included in the Orakei LPMP	27
g ⇩	Parks with non-statutory plans to be included in the Orakei LPMP (but not superceded)	29

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Matthew Ward - Service & Asset Planning Team Leader

Nicki Malone - Service and Asset Planner

Shyrel Burt - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Lisa Tocker - Head of Service Strategy and Integration

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020 grant allocations

File No.: CP2020/05252

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received in Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020 (Attachment B).

3. The Ōrākei Local Board adopted the Ōrākei Local Board Community Grants Programme 2019/2020 on 1 May 2019. The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants.

4. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $219,000 for the 2019/2020 financial year. A total of $110,143 was allocated to Local Grants and Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 and $1,686 was allocated to two Tree Protection Grants. This leaves a total of $107,171 to be allocated to one local grants and one quick response and tree protection grant round.

5. Twenty-Two applications were received for Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020 requesting a total of $152,227.40 and nine applications were received for Multiboard Grants Round Two 2019/2020, requesting a total of $200,425.36.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application received in Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two, listed in Table One.

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG2012-205	Bach Musica NZ Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards music director fees.	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-206	Mr. E V Gadai	Community	Towards catering costs for a healthy living group.	$300.00	Ineligible
LG2012-207	Remuera Chinese Association	Community	Towards the costs for venue hire of Somervall Church Hall from 1 June 2020 to 31 May 2021.	$7,748.00	Eligible
LG2012-210	Remuera Business Association	Community	Towards costs of advertising, table hire, artists, a cross-street banner and street-scape for a market day.	$10,000.00	Ineligible
LG2012-214	Dance Therapy NZ	Community	Towards costs for venue hire, programme facilitation, marketing, materials, supervision, co-ordination, client support and liaison for the “Arts 4 Us” workshops.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-215	Mountains To Sea Conservation Trust: Experiencing Marine Reserves (EMR)	Community	Towards a funded school programme for 120 Ōrākei school senior students.	$5,830.00	Eligible
LG2012-217	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the annual costs for the volunteer training, triage support, supervision and telecommunications of the Helpline service.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-222	Royal New Zealand Plunket Trust	Community	Towards costs to repair the shade sail and support poles at St. Heliers Eastern Bays Playgroup.	$1,600.00	Ineligible
LG2012-212	Kohimarama School	Environment	Towards costs to purchase tools, repair the garden shed and purchase citrus trees	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-216	Accurate Software Solutions Limited	Environment	Towards costs to purchase and plant trees and administration costs.	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-223	Ellerslie Residents Association Incorporated	Environment	Towards costs of e-waste recycling.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-226	Mad Ave Community	Environment	Towards costs including facilitator fees, project management, administration, resources and marketing costs for River Talks 2020.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-224	St Heliers Village Association Incorporated	Events	Towards costs for entertainment, marketing, street banner and road closure for St Heliers Village event in July 2020.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-228	Ellerslie Business Association	Events	Towards costs for the Ellerslie Fairy Festival, Ellerslie Santa Parade and a community event post the COVID-19 crisis.	$20,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-209	St Heliers Bay Village Association Incorporated	Events	Towards costs for marketing, Christmas decorations and entertainers for a Christmas event.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-202	Kohimarama Bowling Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards costs for purchasing bowling balls.	$6,145.00	Eligible
LG2012-203	St Heliers Bay Croquet Club	Sport and recreation	Towards lawn maintenance costs.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-211	Auckland Badminton Association Incoporated	Sport and recreation	Towards costs of the coaches salary and shuttles for the junior development programme from May to October 2020.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-219	East City Community Trust	Sport and recreation	Towards costs to purchase volleyball posts and nets at the stadium.	$7,000.00	Eligible
LG2012-220	Tennis Auckland Region Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards costs for pathway lighting, system installation, connecting the tennis courts and main building at Scarbro Tennis Centre.	$13,975.00	Eligible
LG2012-221	College Rifles Rugby Union Football and Sports Club Inc	Sport and recreation	Towards the costs for the weekly and quarterly field maintenance.	$9,978.00	Eligible
LG2012-225	Auckland Table Tennis Association Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards costs for the development coach fees and new table-tennis tables and bats.	$9,651.40	Eligible
Total				$152,227.40

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application received in Ōrākei Multiboard Grants Round Two 2019/2020, listed in Table Two

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB1920-203	Epsom Chinese Association Incorporated	Community	Towards costs for venue hire (Fickling Centre), marketing, performers fee and workshop materials for a community day on 25 July 2020.	$6,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-243	Anxiety New Zealand Trust	Community	Towards venue hire, psychologist fees, printed resources and administration costs to deliver a series of community workshops from June 2020 to May 2021.	$34,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-259	The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust	Events	Towards the National Young Leaders Day and the "Kids for Kids" mass choir event, including venue hire and production costs from May to November 2020.	$30,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-275	The Reading Revolution	Community	Towards wages for the manager of the reading programme.	$26,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-281	Road Safety Education Limited	Community	Towards the company's operational costs to manage the delivery of the Road Safety Programme across Auckland,	$11,425.36	Eligible
MB1920-294	OUTLine New Zealand Incorporated	Community	Towards a portion of the general operating expenses including telephone and internet costs, printing, insurance, clinical supervision wages, training fees and volunteer costs.	$30,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-2100	The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the National Young Leaders Day and the "Kids for Kids" mass choir event, including venue hire from 8 to 11 November 2020.	$20,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-2110	Social Enterprise Auckland Incorporated	Community	Towards zoom webinars, venue hire, food and drink, administration, donations, project management, video editing and contractor costs.	$33,000.00	Eligible
MB1920-2122	Action Education Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the annual cost of office rent from 1 June 2020 to 31 May 2021.	$10,000.00	Eligible
Total				$200,425.36

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. 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 Ōrākei Local Board adopted the Ōrākei Local Board Community Grants Programme 2019/2020 on 1 May 2019. The document sets application guidelines for 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.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. 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.

12. Due to the current COVID-19 crisis, staff have also assessed each application according to which alert level the proposed activity is able to proceed. For example, under alert level two, only gatherings of up to 100 people can take place. Events and activities have been assessed according to these criteria.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

13. The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by local residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction; increasing access to single-occupancy transport options; home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation; local tree planting and streamside revegetation; and educating about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

15. 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

16. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Ōrākei Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications in accordance with its priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

17. The local 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”.

18. A summary of each application received through Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020 and the Multiboard Round Two 2019/2020 (Attachment B) is provided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

20. Six applicants applying to Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two indicate their projects target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

22. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $219,000 for the 2019/2020 financial year.

23. A total of $110,143 was allocated to Local Grants and Quick Response Round One 2019/2020 and $1686 was allocated to two Tree Protection Grants. This leaves a total of $107,171 to be allocated to one local grants and one quick response round.

24. Twenty-two applications were received for Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020, requesting a total of $152,227.40 and nine applications were received for Multiboard Grants Round Two 2019/2020, requesting a total of $200,425.36

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. 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

26. Following the Ōrākei Local Board allocation of funding for the local grants round two, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ōrākei Grants Programme 2019/2020	39
b ⇩	Ōrākei Local Grants Round Two 2019/2020 grant applications	43
c ⇩	Ōrākei Multi-Board Round Two 2019/2020 grant applications	129

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ann Kuruvilla - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Lease for additional premises to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated

File No.: CP2020/05452

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a lease for additional premises to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated for the tractor shed and adjacent areas on Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated has a current lease with council at Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera. The lease commenced on 15 February 2018 for an initial term of 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years, finally expiring 14 February 2038.

3. The leased premises comprise approximately 350 square metres as shown hatched outlined yellow on Attachment A.

4. The group applied to council in November 2019 seeking to extend the lease area to include areas around the leased building, and to include the adjacent tractor shed shown outlined in blue Attachment A.

5. The group is seeking more space due to a significant growth in membership and increased community project activity. The additional space will allow the group to continue this community service and to improve site security and health and safety.

6. The tractor shed which is adjacent to the leased premises, will serve as extra working and storage space, as the existing facility is at full capacity. The areas around the buildings will also serve as outdoor working space and allow the safe movement between the two buildings.

7. The group’s proposal was workshopped with the local board in February 2020, which informally supported the group’s application, and not to call for expressions of interest to occupy the tractor shed.

8. The lease terms and conditions for the additional premises will align with the current community lease agreement between Auckland Council and the Mens Shed Incorporated executed in 2018.

9. This report recommends that the Ōrākei Local Board grant a lease for additional premises to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated for the tractor shed and areas surrounding both the current premises and the tractor shed.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) agree not to call for expressions of interest for the proposed lease of the tractor shed and adjacent areas on Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera.

b) subject to the satisfaction of any submissions, grant a lease for additional premises of 1174.7 square metres (more or less) to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated for the tractor shed and the areas around the current leased building, and tractor shed, at Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera on land legally described as Part Lot 3 Deposited Plan 68674 subject to the following conditions:

i) term – seven years and nine months commencing 15 May 2020

ii) all other terms and conditions being in accord with the lease agreement between Auckland Council and the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated executed by Auckland Council in 2018.

c) appoint a hearing panel to consider any submissions on the proposed lease to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated for the tractor shed and the areas around the current leased building, and tractor shed, at Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera, as part of the public consultation that may wish to be heard, and to make recommendations to the full board for any further decisions.

Horopaki

Context

10. This report considers the leasing issues with respect to the Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated’s proposal to extend its current lease, to occupy a portion of Waiatarua Reserve.

11. The Ōrākei 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

Land, current community lease and requirement for a lease for additional premises

12. The Mens Shed Auckland Incorporated hold a current lease with council at Waiatarua Reserve, 98 Abbotts Way, Remuera, comprising approximately 350 square metres. The land is legally described as Part Lot 3 Deposited Plan 68674 and is held by the Auckland Council in fee simple under the Local Government Act 2002.

13. The lease commenced 15 February 2018 for an initial term of 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years, finally expiring 14 February 2038.

14. The group applied to council in November 2019 to extend its current lease to include the adjacent tractor shed and areas surrounding both the current premises and the tractor shed, both comprising approximately 705.4 square metres. The areas are shown on Attachment A.

15. The group cited the need for more space for the following reasons:

· a significant growth of its membership, now with 140 plus registered members

· an increase in the scale of community projects they are undertaking

· the risk of not being able to fulfil these requests by the community if they are unable to obtain more space

· improving site security from theft and vandalism, as a result of leaving donated materials outside of the leased building; and

· health and safety issues arising from the lack of space.

16. Following the theft of cedar timber in October 2019, the group applied for and were granted temporary Landlord Approval to store the remaining cedar in the adjacent tractor shed as a temporary means to prevent further theft.

17. In December 2019, the group applied for and were granted an extension of the temporary Landlord Approval, to include the storage of 600 rat traps they were building and required to supply in February 2020 to Pest Free Howick.

18. The tractor shed which is adjacent to the leased premises, will provide extra working and storage space for the group as the existing facility is at full capacity.

19. The areas around the building will serve as partial outdoor working space, and assist with health and safety, allowing for the safe movement of larger scale projects and material between the two buildings.

20. In the two years occupation, the Mens Shed has transformed the current premises from a shell with basic facilities into a multi-purpose light industrial workshop with an associated community meeting room and ablutions.

21. The application for a lease for additional premises was workshopped with the local board in February 2020, which indicated support for the group’s application, and to not call for expressions of interest for the tractor shed area. Reasons for this included: the Mens Shed has proven to be a well-established and growing community group, that are embraced by the local community, who have shown compelling reasons to support their need for more space and whose proposed use supports optimum utilisation of the additional area. The continuation of excellent service which is beneficial to the community, the lack of interest received regarding this specific site during public consultation on the Waiatarua Reserve Enhancement Plan 2019 and the need for consistency as the former local board resolved in 2018 to not call for expressions of interest when the group applied for a lease for the current premises.

22. To enable the group to occupy the additional area, it is recommended that a lease for additional premises be granted and that the additional premises lease is subject to the same terms, conditions as the original, operative lease.

23. The operative Reserve Management Plan for Waiatarua Reserve 1984 does not contemplate the group as they had not been established at that time. However, the Reserve Enhancement Plan recently adopted on 5 December 2019, recognised the group as one of the key stakeholders during the consultation process.

24. As the club’s lease is not contemplated in the 1984 Reserve Management Plan, prior public notification of the intention to grant the lease for additional premises, is required under section 138(2)(a) of the Local Government Act 2002, as the lease is proposed to be longer than six months.

Mens Shed Auckland East Incorporated

25. The Mens Shed Auckland East was incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 on 19 July 2016. Its purposes include the following:

(a) to provide opportunities for members to engage in workshop activities in a mutually supportive and safe environment;

(b) to provide a workshop where members can meet and use the facilities to undertake projects that will benefit both the members and the community;

(c) to educate, train, mentor and assist members to share their knowledge and skills with the other members and the community;

(d) to benefit the health and wellbeing of members and encourage active participation in projects;

(e) to promote fellowship and goodwill among members;

(f) to promote the understanding of Mens issues in the community; and

(g) to do anything else the Board reasonably considers should benefit all or any members, or the community and in accordance with the above purposes.

26. The group has in excess of 140 registered members. Its work and activities have a strong community and environmental focus and contribution. Examples of community projects it has undertaken include the production and assembly of 2,300 rat traps for the eastern suburbs, assembly of tree nursery frames for schools across New Zealand, production of 100 weta condominiums for the eastern suburbs, set-building for Ellerslie Theatrical Society, manufacture of water-walls for early childhood centres, toy making and repairs for toy libraries, early childhood centres and schools, construction and maintenance projects for Conservation Volunteers New Zealand. Groups it has worked with and contributed to include: Ōrākei Community Centre, St Heliers Community Centre, St Paul’s Church, Remuera; Panmure Business Association, Waiatarua Reserve Preservation Society, Ellerslie Business Association, and a number of schools and play centres within the local community.

27. The group financial accounts indicate that funds are sufficient to meet liabilities and are being managed appropriately.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28. There is no impact on Green House Gas emissions as the proposal does not introduce any new source of emissions.

29. Climate change is unlikely to impact the lease as the site is not within a flooding zone or near the coast.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30. Council staff from the Parks, Sports and Recreation and the Service Strategy and Integration teams were canvassed on the proposal for the additional premises and did not have any concerns.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. The recommendations within this report support the Ōrākei Local Board 2017 outcomes of: ‘Our residents are proud of their community facilities and public places;’ and ‘The natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced by our communities.’

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2012-2022, the Unitary Plan and Local Board Plans.

33. Iwi engagement took place on 29 April 2020 at the Mana Whenua Forum, who had no objections to the proposed lease for additional premises to the group. The original lease proposal was presented to a Mana Whenua forum on 18 October 2017 with the majority in support of the original proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34. The cost of public notification of the intent to lease and any resulting hearing is borne by Community Facilities and Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. Should the Ōrākei Local Board resolve not to grant a lease for additional premises to the group, there would be a loss of valuable service to the community as the group will be unable to meet the increase in demand for their services owing to lack of space to undertake work and store materials. This would also remain the continued risk to security of assets owned or donated to the group by the community, to assist with community projects.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36. As the lease is proposed to be longer than six months iwi consultation and public notification is required under the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002.

37. If there are any submissions resulting from the consultation and notification process staff will work with the chair of the local board on the process to consider any submissions. If any of the submitters wish to be heard, a hearing panel should be appointed to hear these and make any recommendations to the board for further decisions. The local board can either appoint the whole board as the hearings panel or delegate to fewer members to form the panel. This report recommends that a hearing panel be appointed.

38. Subject to the local board’s approval to grant a lease of additional premises, and the satisfaction of any submissions, staff will prepare the deed and associated documents for execution by the trust and council.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Site plan of leased area	185

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Valerie Vui - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Endorsing Business Improvement District (BID) targeted rates for 2020/2021

File No.: CP2020/05614

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To request the local board to recommend that the Governing Body sets the targeted rates for the Ellerslie Village, Remuera and St Heliers Village Business Improvement District (BID) programmes for the 2020/2021 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are areas within Tāmaki Makaurau, including the Ōrākei rohe, where local business and property owners have agreed to work together to improve their business environment and attract new businesses and customers.

3. Auckland Council supports business associations operating BID programmes, including Ellerslie Business Association (EBA), Remuera Business Association (RBA) and St Heliers Village Association (SHVA), by collecting a targeted rate from commercial properties within a defined geographic area. The funds from the targeted rate are then provided by way of a BID grant to the relevant business association.

4. Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities in relation to BIDs. One of these is to annually recommend BID targeted rates to the Governing Body.

5. Each business association operating a BID programme sets the BID grant amount at its Annual General Meeting (AGM) when members vote to approve an operational budget for the following financial year. This budget funds the implementation of a business plan that delivers programmes based on each BID’s strategic priorities.

6. Ōrākei’s three BID-operating business associations seek to retain the same BID targeted rate amounts for the 2020/2021 financial year.

7. The business associations operating BID programmes are incorporated societies that are independent of the council. However, to sustain public trust and confidence in the council, there needs to be a balance between the BIDs’ independence and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

8. For the council to be confident that the targeted rate funds provided to the BIDs are being used appropriately, the council requires the BIDs to comply with the Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi), known as the BID Policy.

9. The council staff regularly monitor compliance with the BID Policy and this report is part of an active risk management programme to minimise inappropriate use of funds.

10. Staff are satisfied the EBA, RBA and SHVA sufficiently comply with the BID Policy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) recommend to the Governing Body the setting of the targeted rate for the Ellerslie Village Business Improvement District Programme for the 2020/2021 financial year to achieve the amount of $162,000 for Ellerslie Business Association Incorporated and include this amount in the Annual Budget 2020/2021.

b) recommend to the Governing Body the setting of the targeted rate for the Remuera Business Improvement District Programme for the 2020/2021 financial year to achieve the amount of $242,564 for The Remuera Business Association Incorporated and include this amount in the Annual Budget 2020/2021.

c) recommend to the Governing Body the setting of the targeted rate for the St Heliers Village Business Improvement District Programme for the 2020/2021 financial year to achieve the amount of $138,484 for St Heliers Village Association Incorporated and include this amount in the Annual Budget 2020/2021.

Horopaki

Context

BID programmes promote economic well-being and collaboration with the council

11. Tāmaki Makaurau is growing fast and is projected to include another one million people in the next 30 years. This level of population growth presents challenges and opportunities for Auckland town centres and commercial precincts.

12. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) are areas within Auckland where local business and property owners have agreed to work together, with support from the council, to improve their business environment and attract new businesses and customers.

13. BID programmes provide the opportunity for the council group to partner with business associations, including the EBA, RBA and SHVA, to seize on the opportunities from Auckland’s growth and respond locally to changing economic conditions.

14. BID programmes encourage collaboration to achieve greater local outcomes. They provide a mechanism to enable local boards to engage with the business sector in local town centres and business areas in a co-ordinated way.

BIDs provide essential support in the economic recovery from COVID-19

15. The economy has been heavily impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdown, affecting both retail-based town centres and industrial precincts.

16. BID-programme operating business associations will now, more than ever, provide the local business leadership required to help businesses recover from the seismic economic shock and transition to a viable future state.

BIDs are funded by a targeted rate on business ratepayers within a set area

17. BID programmes are funded by a targeted rate applied to all commercially rated properties within a designated area around a town centre or commercial precinct.

18. Auckland Council supports business associations operating BID programmes by collecting the targeted rates and providing these funds, in their entirety, by way of a BID grant to the relevant business association.

19. This revenue is paid to the business associations every quarter to provide a regular and sustainable income stream to implement an agreed work programme.

The BID Policy is the mechanism to ensure accountability for BID targeted rates

20. Auckland Council’s Business Improvement District (BID) Policy (2016) (Hōtaka ā-Rohe Whakapiki Pakihi) ensures accountability for BID targeted rate funding and encourages good governance and programme management.

21. The policy outlines the principles behind the council’s BID programme; creates the process for establishing, expanding, amalgamating and disestablishing BIDs; determines rating mechanisms; prescribes operating standards and guidelines; and sets accountability requirements.

Diagram A: From calculation to approval, how the BID targeted rate is set.

The business association sets the BID grant amount to deliver its work programme

22. BID-operating business associations are provided with a rate modelling spreadsheet to help with their budget decision-making. The spreadsheet models any proposed changes to their current BID grant amount and, most importantly, how that influences the BID targeted rate for everyone who will pay it. When weighing up a change to the BID grant amount, BIDs must consider what the local business and property owners can afford.

23. Each BID prepares an annual business plan for the following financial year that will deliver programmes based on their strategic priorities and financial parameters.

24. The cost of implementing that business plan is set out in an annual budget that the BID’s board (governing committee) agrees will be recommended for approval by the business association membership.

25. The AGM provides the forum where members vote to approve the operational budget and, in doing so, set the requisite BID grant amount for the following financial year.

26. However, in the wake of changing economic conditions such as those caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown, a business association’s board can choose to rescind, or reduce the level of, any proposed increase. Ellerslie’s board took that option in April 2020, rescinding the AGM’s decision to increase its BID targeted rate and reverting to the financial status quo.

Local boards are responsible for recommending the targeted rate if a BID complies with the BID Policy

27. Under the Auckland Council shared governance arrangements, local boards are allocated several decision-making responsibilities in relation to BIDs. One of these is to annually recommend BID targeted rates to the Governing Body. The local board should recommend the setting of the targeted rate if it is satisfied that the BID is substantially complying with the BID Policy.

28. BID programme managers, Megan Darrow (Ellerslie), Robin Chemaly (Remuera) and Pippa Burrett (St Heliers), addressed the local board on 25 February 2020 to update members on the progress towards achieving their respective BID’s business and strategic plans.

29. The Ōrākei Local Board approved similar recommendations for the three BID programmes last year (resolution number OR/2019/76), as did 17 other local boards that have BID programmes operating in their rohe.

The Governing Body sets the targeted rate when it approves the Annual Budget

30. The recommendation in this report is put into effect with the Governing Body’s approval of the Annual Budget 2020/2021 and its setting (striking) of the targeted rates.

31. In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the Governing Body is authorized to make the final decisions on what BID programme targeted rates, if any, to set in any particular year or property (in terms of the amount and the geographic area to be rated).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

32. BID programmes are operated by independent business associations (incorporated societies), and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities.

33. In recognition of their independent status, the BID Policy does not prescribe standards for programme effectiveness. That is a matter for the business association members to determine.

34. Staff, therefore, cannot base recommendations on these factors, but only on the policy’s express requirements.

Ellerslie Village, Remuera and St Heliers Village all comply with the BID Policy

35. Staff are satisfied the EBA, RBA and SHVA sufficiently meet the requirements of the BID Policy.

36. Staff require BID-operating business associations to provide to the council the following documents, and stay in touch with their local board(s) at least once a year:

· Current strategic plan – evidence of achievable medium to long-term opportunities.

· Audited accounts – assurance that the BID-operating business association is managing its members’ BID targeted rate funds responsibly.

· Annual report on the year just completed – evidence that programmes are addressing priority issues that benefit BID targeted ratepayers.

· Business plan for the coming year – detailed one-year programme, based on the strategic plan, to be achieved and resourced.

· Indicative budget for the following year – Auckland Council’s Annual Budget requires targeted rates to be identified a year in advance to inform the Annual Budget process which sets all rates.

· Board Charter – establishes guidelines for effective board governance and positive relationships between the association and its members.

· Annual Accountability Agreement – certification that these requirements have been met.

· Programme Agreement – a good faith agreement between each BID-operating business association and the council that sets basic parameters of the council-business association relationship.

· AGM minutes - provisional minutes of each business association’s 2019 AGM meetings which contain the resolution, voted on by members, confirming the BID grant amount for the following financial year.

37. In addition, BID-operating business associations must inform the council of progress with other compliance requirements, including:

· Incorporated Society registration – a current registration of the business association and all required documents up to date.

· Key initiatives – activities identified to be advanced in the next financial year.

· Resolving problems or issues, if any – problems or issues that have an impact on the governance or operation of the BID programme.

38. The BID Policy sets an annual compliance deadline of 10 March for the information to be forwarded to the council. The table below summarises the requirements for the three BIDs within the Ōrākei Local Board area as of 10 March 2020.

Table 1: Business associations’ compliance with the BID Policy

Requirement FY 2018/2019
Strategic Plan	2017-2022	2017-2022	under review
Audited financials
Annual Report
Business Plan
Indicative budget
Board Charter
Annual Accountability Agreement
Annual meeting w/ local board	25 February 2020	25 February 2020	25 February 2020
Programme Agreement	valid to October 2022	valid to November 2022	valid to June 2023
Incorporated society registration
Key initiatives
Key initiatives	Placemaking; infrastructural upgrade advocacy	New BID Mgr inducted; car parking provision; video marketing campaigns	New strategic plan to align with LBP; member engagement/surveys.
2019 AGM minutes (provisional)	NB – rate rise rescinded
Resolving problems or issues	Nothing to record	Nothing to record	Nothing to record

39. As the EBA, RBA and SHVA have complied with the BID Policy, staff advise the local board to recommend to the Governing Body the setting of the targeted rates.

Remuera, St Heliers keep current BID grants, Ellerslie rescinds proposed increase

40. As shown in Table 2 below, none of the three BID-operating business associations now propose an increase to their BID targeted rates for the 2020/2021 financial year.

41. At their 2019 AGM, Ellerslie’s members supported a $10,000 (6.6 per cent) increase to achieve the amount of $172,000, to fund streetscape enhancements, deliver events and meet increased insurance and compliance costs. That decision was rescinded by the BID’s board in April 2020, in recognition of the economic downturn, and the financial status quo was maintained.

42. Remuera has maintained its BID grant at $242,564 for the next financial year. Records show this business association has not increased the sum since 2012.

43. St Heliers has also kept its BID grant at the current level, $138,484, for many years.

44. While some among Tāmaki Makaurau’s 48 BID-operating business associations reaffirmed decisions to increase their 2020/2021 targeted rates, with rises ranging from 1.2 per cent to 14.4 per cent, at least eight BIDs across Auckland rescinded their AGM rate resolutions in recognition of the economic downturn, and opted for the current, 2019/2020 BID grant levels.

Table 2: BID targeted rates comparison: 2020/2021 c.f. 2019/2020

BID

2020/2021

2019/2020

Increase / per cent

$162,000

$162,000

Nil

(Proposed rate rise rescinded)

$242,564

$242,564

Nil

$138,484

$138,484

Nil

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

45. Through targeted rate-funded advocacy and activities, BID-operating business associations promote and often facilitate environmental sustainability programmes.

46. From running carbon-reducing ‘shop local’ campaigns to transitioning to energy-efficient lighting and championing waste reduction and recovery programmes, there are many examples of BIDs within this local board rohe and beyond responding to the world’s climate change emergency.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. Advocacy is a key service provided by business associations and those with BID programme-funded personnel are at an advantage. The BIDs ensure the views and ambitions of their members are provided to the council family, including CCOs, on those plans, policies, projects and programmes which impact them.

48. The BIDs work most closely with Auckland Transport on various matters and Auckland Tourism Events and Economic Development (ATEED) on local economic development initiatives, events and sustainability programmes

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

Local impacts and local board views

49. The local board’s views are most frequently expressed by its appointed representative on the board of each BID-operating business association. This liaison board member can attend BID board meetings to ensure there is a direct link between the council and the operation of the BID programme.

50. Each BID values its strong and enduring governance-to-governance relationship with the Ōrākei Local Board. The contributions by the local board’s ‘BID representatives’, past and present, have promoted mutual understanding, collaboration and aligned economic outcomes.

Visions, plans aligned

51. Ōrākei’s BIDs and local board share an interest in the rohe and are ambitious for its future and its people. They also share goals that include economic prosperity, community identity, placemaking and pride.

52. The three BID programmes tangibly support the aspirations of the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2017, best expressed in Outcome 5: A thriving economy which supports local businesses and town centres.

53. From their constitutions to their activities, the BIDs exist to enhance their business districts and sustain the economic viability of their targeted ratepaying members.

Local rohe, local benefit, local funding

54. Recommending that the Governing Body strikes the targeted rates for EBA, RBA and SHVA means that these BID programmes will continue to be funded from targeted rates on commercial properties in their rohe, and provide services in accordance with their members’ priorities as stated in their strategic plans.

55. Several local boards, including Ōrākei, provide additional funding to local business associations, however accountability for any grants is set by funding agreements between the local board and the business association. Those contractual obligations are separate from the requirements of the BID Policy and are not covered in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

56. At the 2018 Census, Māori represented 5.7 per cent of the population living in the Ōrākei Local Board area, compared to 11.5 per cent of Auckland. Individual business associations may, through operating their BID programme, identify opportunities for niche support or development of any Māori business sector in their rohe.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

57. There are no financial implications for the local board. Targeted rates for BID-operating business associations are raised directly from commercial ratepayers in the district and used by the business association for improvements within that rohe. The council’s financial role is to collect the BID targeted rates and pass them directly to the association every quarter.

58. The targeted rate is payable by the owners of the commercial properties within the geographic area of the individual BID programmes. In practice, this cost is often passed on to the business owners who occupy these properties. This cost will be harder to meet at a time when businesses are financially impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. The council may consider extending its Rates Remission and Postponement Policy to commercial property owners as part of the Annual Budget 2020/2021. If approved, this would help mitigate impact of the targeted rate on those who are struggling financially.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

59. There are no direct financial risks to the local board or the council that could result from this recommendation to endorse the BID targeted rate for the three business associations.

60. To sustain public trust and confidence in the council, there needs to be a balance between the independence of the BID-operating business association and the accountability for monies collected by a public sector organisation.

61. The rules and obligations of the BID Policy are intended to help minimise the potential for BIDs to misuse funds by requiring each BID to plan for their intended use, report on its activities to its members and to have its accounts audited.

62. The council staff regularly monitor compliance with the BID Policy and this report is part of an active risk management programme to minimise inappropriate use of funds.

63. The economic shockwaves created by the COVID-19 global pandemic are being felt everywhere, including Auckland’s town centres and business precincts. The BID programme is an internationally proven approach to engage and empower local businesses. The three BID programmes in this local board area can, through business resilience and recovery initiatives, help to mitigate some of the economic effects of the pandemic.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. If the board supports this report, it will recommend to the Governing Body that the BID targeted rates be set as part of the Annual Budget 2020/2021.

65. After the Annual Budget is approved, the council collects the targeted rate funds and distributes them in quarterly BID grant payments, effective from 1 July 2020, to the EBA, RBA and SHVA to implement programmes that improve the local business environment, support businesses to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and help address the climate change emergency through sustainability initiatives.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Excerpts from business association AGM provisional minutes	195

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Paul Thompson - BID Programme Specialist

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport May 2020 update report	201

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Plan Change 31 - Additions to Schedule 14 Historic Heritage - Local board views

File No.: CP2020/03737

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the opportunity for the Ōrākei Local Board to provide its views on a council-initiated plan change to add historic heritage places to Schedule 14 Historic Heritage of the Auckland Unitary Plan (operative in part).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers for a council-initiated plan change must consider the Ōrākei Local Board’s views on the plan change, if the local board chooses to provide its views.

3. Each local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents, including council-initiated plan changes.

4. Plan Change 31 seeks to add six historic heritage places to Schedule 14 of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Four of these places, including three individual places, and one historic heritage area are located within the Ōrākei Local Board area.

5. This report is the mechanism for the Ōrākei Local Board to provide its views on Plan Change 31.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) provide local board views on Plan Change 31 to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

b) appoint a local board member to speak on behalf of the local board at a hearing on Plan Change 31 to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

c) delegate authority to the chairperson of the local board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in Resolution b) is unable to attend the hearing on Plan Change 31 to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

6. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in the area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Sections 15 and 16 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 directs that decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents.

7. Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on plan changes particularly where there may be a greater public interest on the outcome.

8. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes these views in the hearing report. Local board views are included in the analysis of the plan change, along with submissions.

9. The Local Board will be invited to present its views at the hearing to commissioners, who make the decision on the plan change.

10. This report provides an overview of the plan change and a summary of the submissions’ key themes. The report does not include a recommendation. The planner must include any local board views in the evaluation of the plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Plan change overview

11. Plan Change 31 seeks to add six historic heritage places to the Schedule 14 of the AUP.

12. Three historic heritage places and one historic heritage area included in the plan change are within the Ōrākei Local Board area. These are:

· Glenholm, 37 Portland Road, Remuera

· Remuera Primary School War Memorial Gates, 25-33 Dromorne Road, Remuera

· Remuera Post Office (former), 358-364 Remuera Road, Remuera

· Upland Village Historic Heritage Area, parts of Remuera Road, Upland Road and Minto Road, Remuera.

13. The Ōrākei Local Board funded the heritage evaluations for these places in the 2017/2018 financial year.

14. The board was advised of this upcoming plan change in May 2019. As requested by the board, landowners were sent letters also informing them of the plan change, prior to its notification.

15. Council staff discussed the upcoming plan change with the landowners of Glenholm, Remuera Post Office (former), and properties within the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area. Prior to its notification, landowners were generally supportive of the plan change.

16. The plan change was publicly notified in August 2019, with the submission period closing in September 2019. Eleven submissions were received on the plan change: eight relating to properties in the Ōrākei Local Board area.

17. A summary of the decisions requested in submissions was notified in October 2019. Five further submissions were received: four relating to the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area and one to Glenholm.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Themes from the submissions received

18. Submissions were received for all six historic heritage places in PC31. The key submission themes are listed below to inform the local board of views and preferences expressed by local people:

· support for both overall and specific historic heritage places to be added to Schedule 14

· support with amendments including submissions seeking:

o properties to be removed from PC31, particularly within the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area

o various amendments to exclusions and extent of place, including the exclusions for the Remuera Post Office (former).

· opposition to specific historic heritage places being added to Schedule 14, including submissions seeking:

o Glenholm to be deleted from PC31. Alternatively, the further submitter seeks additional exclusions, along with the garage, pool and interior, which are not subject to the provisions of the historic heritage overlay (roof, verandahs, conservatory, utility rooms (laundry and pantry/larder), link passageway, first floor terrace and other decks)

o the deletion of the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area.

· the methodology for evaluating the historic heritage values present for particular places

· the impact of scheduling on the value of a property and the ability for future development. In particular, the capacity of the underlying zoning and restrictions on demolition.

19. A summary of the submissions received in relation to historic heritage places within the local board area is attached (refer to Attachment A).

Certificate of compliance for demolition

20. A certificate of compliance (COC) for demolition was granted for four buildings prior to the notification of the plan change. These buildings are:

· the Remuera Post Office (Former)

· within the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area:

o 547-549, 551-553, and 561 Remuera Road.

21. A COC confirms an activity is permitted. Once a COC is issued, it is deemed to be a resource consent. This means, for the buildings that have a COC issued, their demolition is permitted for up to five years.

22. The potential for COCs to be lodged was identified as a risk with the pre-notification engagement with landowners.

23. From the time of notification, the plan change has had immediate legal effect. This means demolition is no longer a permitted activity and a COC cannot be granted for other places identified in Plan Change 31.

24. Previous plan changes have protected places subject to COCs. The commissioners for Plan Change 7 determined:

We are not persuaded that factors such as demolition consents should make any material difference to listing (adding places to the Historic Heritage overlay) or not. We were presented with a number of examples where demolition consents have been issued but not actioned.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. The decision whether to provide local board views:

· will not have an impact on greenhouse gas emissions

· is a decision of short duration. The decision whether to provide local board views will not be impacted by a climate that changes over the lifetime of that decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. Discussions were undertaken with Auckland Transport, prior to notification, due to the road reserve being proposed to be included within the extent of place for a number of historic heritage places.

27. Auckland Transport lodged a submission in general support of the plan change, while also seeking the removal of the road reserve from the extent of place of the following places:

· Remuera Post Office (former)

· Remuera Primary School War Memorial Gates

· Upland Village Historic Heritage Area.

28. The extent of place is the area that is integral to the function, meaning and relationships of the historic heritage place and illustrates the values identified for the place. The provisions relating to a historic heritage place apply within the area mapped as the extent of place.

29. The issue of the extent of place for each of these places will be considered in the hearing report.

30. However, there is clear guidance in the methodology that the heritage specialist use in evaluating the historic heritage values of a place when determining the extent of place. This includes where parts of the road reserve should be identified in the extent of place including:

· where a building is situated on the boundary with the road reserve, with no setback

· to protect the heritage values of the place and to protect its views from the public realm

· an historic heritage area where the area should be included as a whole with no gaps and holes and the boundary should run around, rather than through a space, street or land parcel.

31. Provisions within the Auckland Unitary Plan do allow Auckland Transport to undertake a wide range of permitted activities without the need for a resource consent. In some situations a resource consent process is the most appropriate way to consider the effects of a proposed activity in relation to the significance of the historic heritage values of a place.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. Plan Change 31 involves places within three local board areas; Orakei Local Board, Rodney Local Board and Albert-Eden Local Board.

33. Four of the six historic heritage places, including the Upland Village Historic Heritage Area, are within the Orakei Local Board area. The Local Board funded the historic heritage evaluations of these places.

34. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view are:

· the interests and preferences of people in the local board area

· the well-being of communities within the local board area

· local board documents, such as the local board plan, local board agreement

· the responsibilities and operation of the local board.

35. Previous consultation with the local board includes the following:

· Information memo, dated 17 May 2019, informing of the proposed plan change

· An update at a workshop on 30 May 2019

· A memo, dated 29 August 2019, on the public notification of the proposed plan change

· A memo, dated 6 April 2020, prior to council staff attending the business meeting on 18 May 2020.

36. Feedback at the above stages was informal; restrictions on delegations prevent that informal feedback from being the views of the local board (Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7. Part 1A, clause 36D).

37. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views so that the decision-maker can consider those views.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. The six historic heritage places included in Plan Change 31 have been identified primarily for their built heritage values.

39. The draft plan change, along with the draft s32 evaluation report, was provided to iwi authorities on 4 July 2019 prior to public notification. The letter also sought the iwi’s views on whether there was interest to appoint a commissioner with tikanga Māori.

40. One response was received from Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua who advised that they had an interest in the area (but did not provide specifics of this interest), deferred those interests to Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei in the anticipation that they would provide an appropriate response, and anticipated that their future involvement would be determined following Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei’s due consideration. The other response was from Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei who advised that they do not need to engage in this instance, but would be grateful if they were kept in the information loop.

41. All iwi authorities were sent letters when the plan change was publicly notified. No submissions from iwi authorities were received. No request was received to appoint a commissioner with an understanding of tikanga Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. No resourcing is necessary to enable the local board to provide its views.

43. The local board is not exposed to any financial risk from providing its views.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s). This report enables the whole board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Any views provided by the local board will be included in the hearing report. The local board will be informed of the hearing date and invited to speak at the hearing in support of its views. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of submissions received within Orakei Local Board area	215

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jo Hart - Planner - Planning North/West

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Local board feedback on Plan Change 22 and Plan Modification 12 – additions of places of significance to Mana Whenua

File No.: CP2020/05808

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To request the views of the local board on:

· Plan Change 22 (PC22) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part)(AUP)

· Plan Modification 12 (PM12) to the Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section 2018 (Inner Islands) (HGI).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In 2014, in collaboration with 19 Mana Whenua entities, Auckland Council (the council) initiated the Māori Cultural Heritage Programme (MCHP) to improve the understanding and protection of Māori cultural heritage across the Auckland region.

3. As part of the implementation of the findings of the MCHP, the council has proposed two plan changes in order to appropriately recognise and protect culturally significant sites within both the AUP and HGI. These two plan changes form tranche one of what is intended to be a series of future plan changes to progressively identify and protect culturally significant sites.

4. Eleven Mana Whenua entities have completed assessments for sites in these plan changes. Thirty-three sites are proposed for scheduling: 30 sites in the AUP and four in the HGI. Note that one site, Te Rangihoua (Te Putiki o Kahumatamomoe), is included in both the AUP and HGI to represent its landward and coastal extents.

5. On 21 March 2019, PC22 and PM12 were originally notified. Following submissions and after further analysis, on 26 September 2019 a minor correction was made to PC22 to remove an incorrect reference. Due to technical and procedural issues, on 24 October 2019 a second amendment to withdraw the Te Wairoa River site was notified. On 11 February 2020, the plan changes were then re-notified to a limited number of directly affected parties.

6. The details of the sites related to the local board are listed in Attachment A.

7. Key themes of the submissions received are to:

· support PC22 as notified

· support PC22 with a minor amendments to Schedule 14.1 and a site description in Schedule 12

· oppose PC22 due to potential effects on houseboat activities

· support PM12 as notified

· support PM12 and apply the same approach to other reserves on Waiheke Island

· oppose PM12 for various other reasons.

8. On 8 August 2019, the Regulatory Committee appointed three independent hearing commissioners to hear and make decisions on PC22 and PM12 (REG/2019/49). This included at least two independent commissioners with expertise in planning and tikanga Māori.

9. This report is the mechanism for the local board to provide its formal views on PC22 and PM12 prior to the public hearing. Any comments received will be included in the planner’s hearing report and considered by the independent commissioners. Any local board views provided should be that of the local board, therefore no technical recommendations are made in this report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) provide local board views on Plan Change 22 and Plan Modification 12.

b) appoint a local board member to speak on behalf of the local board views at a hearing on the plan changes.

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

10. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of the council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents.

11. In 2014, the council initiated a Māori Cultural Heritage Programme (MCHP) in collaboration with 19 Mana Whenua entities in the Auckland region with the purpose of improving the understanding and protection of Māori cultural heritage and to identify the best management options that recognise and protect the cultural values of these sites. To date 400 such sites of have been nominated by Mana Whenua for consideration.

12. The AUP currently contains 75 scheduled Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua. There are no Māori Heritage sites currently identified in the HGI Plan.

13. The Auckland Council’s Planning Committee resolution (PLA/2017/39) approved engagement with Mana Whenua and landowners in order to develop draft plan changes to add qualifying sites to the AUP and the HGI plan. The criteria to identify and evaluate these sites are contained within the Auckland Regional Policy Statement section of the AUP.

14. On 27 November 2018, the Planning Committee resolved to approve the proposed plan changes for notification (PLA/2018/128).

15. The plan changes propose:

i. The addition of 30 sites to the AUP’s Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua Overlay, as identified in Chapter L Schedule 12. There are also consequential changes to Schedule 6 (Outstanding Natural Features) and Schedule 14.1 (Historic Heritage Overlay) to reflect the cultural significance of the identified sites; and

ii. The addition of four sites to the HGI Plan. There are also changes to the explanatory text of the plan to clarify the criteria by which sites are identified and evaluated.

16. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the reporting planner will include those views in the hearing report for these plan changes. Local board views will be included in the analysis of the plan changes and submissions received.

17. If the local board chooses to provide its views, local board members will be invited to present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who make the decision on the plan changes.

18. This report provides an overview of PC22 and PM12 and gives a summary of the key themes which have arisen through submissions. This report does not include a recommendation. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Plan change overview

19. The AUP and the HGI plans contain objectives, policies, and rules to manage and protect both Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua (AUP), and Māori Heritage sites (HGI). The proposed plan changes do not alter any of the existing objectives, policies, rules or resource consent assessment criteria set out in the two plans.

20. PC22 proposes the following changes:

· The addition of 30 Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua (SSMW) to Schedule 12 of AUP.

· The addition of a ‘significance of the site to Mana Whenua’ evaluation criterion (criterion k) to eight sites already listed in Schedule 6 – Outstanding Natural Features Overlay of the AUP.

· The addition of the ‘significance of the site to Mana Whenua’ evaluation criterion (criterion c) to five sites already listed in Schedule 14.1 - Schedule of Historic Heritage Overlay of the AUP(OiP).

· The addition of the sites to the AUP viewer (the online tool to view the AUP maps).

21. PM12 proposes the following changes:

· The addition of four Māori Heritage Sites (MHS) to Appendix 1f of the HGI.

· The addition of explanatory text to Appendix 1f, Appendix 4 and Part 7.13 of the HGI – Māori heritage to include references to the criteria for the identification and evaluation of MHS.

· The addition of the sites to the HGI planning maps.

Further discussion:

22. There are 33 sites proposed across both PC22 and PM12. These sites cover a wide range of zones including open space, coastal marine area, and transport corridor zones.

23. The sites are owned by or designated by Auckland Transport, Department of Conservation, Auckland Council, CRL Ltd, Ports of Auckland, The NZ Transport Agency, Watercare, LINZ, Ministry of Education, Transpower NZ Ltd and First Gas Limited.

24. By scheduling the sites, there will be greater awareness and weight placed on existing objectives, policies and methods within the plans for protecting cultural heritage when considering applications for resource consent, private plan changes, designations and policy development in both plans.

25. In the AUP, scheduling introduces more restrictions on activities within the sites with respect to disturbance in the coastal marine area, temporary activities, new buildings and structures, new alterations and additions to existing buildings, and subdivision.

26. In the HGI, scheduling will remove permitted levels of ground disturbance within scheduled sites, making all ground disturbance activities require resource consent. Resource consent will also be required for establishing toilets and changing facilities within scheduled sites.

Themes from submissions received

27. On 21 March 2019, PC22 and PM12 were originally notified. Following submissions and after further analysis, on 26 September 2019 a minor correction was made to PC22 to remove an incorrect reference. Due to technical and procedural issues, on 24 October 2019 a second amendment to withdraw the Te Wairoa River site was notified. On 11 February 2020, the plan changes were then re-notified to a limited number of directly affected parties.

28. Following the processes outlined above, a total of seven primary submissions and two further submissions have been received for PC22. Six primary submissions and three further submissions have been received for PM12. The following key themes have been identified in the submissions received:

· support PC22 as notified

· support PC22 with minor amendments to Schedule 14.1 and a site description in Schedule 12

· oppose PC22 due to potential effects on houseboat activities

· support PM12 as notified

· support PM12 and apply the same approach to other reserves on Waiheke Island

· oppose PM12 for various other reasons.

29. Minor amendments identify a technical error in the plan change where an evaluation criterion has been omitted from one of the schedules. They also propose additional wording to one of the site descriptions to include reference to bird roosting/gathering sites.

30. Effects on existing houseboat activities in Putiki Bay (Waiheke Island) are of concern to two houseboat owners. Heritage scheduling which is outside the proposed plan change area is of concern to one submitter opposing PM12.

31. One submitter is opposing the scheduling of Rangihoua Park / Onetangi Sports Fields on Waiheke Island as part of PM12 on the basis that they feel the scheduling would place unrealistic conditions on the continued use and development of these activities. This was supported by one further submission with 92 co-signatories.

32. On 26 March 2020, the latest summary of the decisions requested by submitters on PC22 was notified and is available on the council’s website at the following link: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/proposed-plan-changes/pc22summarydecisions/summary-of-decisions-requested-and-submissions.pdf

33. On 26 March 2020, the latest summary of the decisions requested by submitters on PM12 was notified and is available on the council’s website at the following link: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/proposed-plan-changes/docspc22/pm-12-renotification.pdf

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

34. The decision whether to provide local board views:

· will not lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions and negatively affect the approach to reduce emissions.

· will not be impacted by a climate that changes over the lifetime of that decision.

35. This is because the plan changes do not promote new activities within the sites and, by their nature of protecting Māori cultural heritage, are unlikely to encourage a greater intensity of development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. As mentioned previously, the 33 sites covered by these two plan changes cover a range of environments. These include roads, carparks, publicly owned parks and lakes, rivers and streams. They are also subject to a number of designations.

37. During the development of the plan changes, relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations (CCO) were consulted. With respect to council internal departments, the sites have particular relevance to the council’s Customer and Community Services Department. This department includes the Community Facilities, Parks, Sports and Recreation, and Service Strategy and Integration teams.

38. Many of the proposed sites contain leases which are managed by the above department. The strategic management of public open spaces is also managed by these teams through the use of reserve management plans as well as other open space and recreation planning tools.

39. The Customer and Community Services Department has been actively involved in the plan changes during their development and notification. None of these teams have raised opposition to the proposed scheduling.

40. From a CCO perspective, Auckland Transport has been involved in the development of the plan changes as they apply to public roads and parking infrastructure. Auckland Transport is not opposed to the plan changes.

41. One of the sites, Te Puna Wai a Hape (Site 091), schedules land currently owned by Watercare Services Limited. Watercare has been involved during the development of the plan changes and is not opposed to the scheduling.

42. No CCO has made a submission or further submission on PC22 or PM12.

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

Local impacts and local board views

43. Further detail such as a map showing the location of the sites relevant to the local board and previous involvement by the board are in Attachment A.

44. The main impact of PC22 and PM12 is to place greater recognition on the cultural significance of identified sites. This is likely to increase the need for consultation with affected Mana Whenua when considering activities within the sites. The scheduling places greater restrictions on some land use activities and coastal activities as outlined previously.

45. A summary here of what local board engagement was undertaken during the development of this plan change is included in Attachment A.

46. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view are as follows: interests and preferences of people in the local board area; well-being of communities within the local board area; local board documents, such as the local plan and local board agreement; responsibilities and operation of the local board.

47. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views so the decision-makers on PC22 and PM12 can consider those views.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48. This report addresses matters that relate to two plan changes to protect and manage new nominated sites and places of cultural significance to Mana Whenua. All Mana Whenua entities have been invited to participate in this process and 11 Mana Whenua entities have actively contributed to these plan changes.

49. Recognising and protecting Mana Whenua cultural heritage is identified as an issue of regional significance in the Auckland Unitary Plan Regional Policy Statement (RPS). Policies in the RPS specifically provide for the identification, protection and enhancement of the tangible and intangible values of identified Mana Whenua cultural heritage.

50. In November 2018, a governance hui was conducted where staff briefed all 19 Mana Whenua entities on the feedback received from the 14 affected local boards and of the landowner engagement. The IMSB has also been kept informed of these plan changes and has participated in their approval for notification.

51. Some iwi authorities have made submissions in support of these plan changes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

52. The local board is not exposed to any financial risk from providing its views.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

53. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s). This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

54. Any views provided by the local board will be included in the planner’s hearing report. The local board will be informed of the hearing date and invited to speak at the hearing in support of its views. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Sites related to the Ōrākei Local Board	223

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Matthew Gouge - Planner AUPIHP

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards

Ōrākei Local Board

21 May 2020

Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency Innovating Streets for People pilot fund

File No.: CP2020/05913

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide local boards with an overview of the Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) Innovating Streets for People pilot fund (ISPF).

2. To request feedback on projects within your local board area that have been proposed by staff across Auckland Transport (AT), Auckland Council, and Panuku for inclusion in Auckland Council’s application to the ISPF.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) announced a pilot fund in April 2020 that supports pilot projects and interim improvements for safe active transport. The Innovating Streets Pilot Fund (ISPF) is intended to help councils create more people-friendly spaces through the application of tactical urbanism techniques such as pilots, pop ups and interim projects. While the fund is intended to support pilots that can be rolled out rapidly and at relatively low cost, projects should also be able to demonstrate a pathway to more permanent status, should they prove successful.

4. Local boards have previously been invited to contribute localised strategic direction and guidance regarding projects that may be suitable to submit for funding. This guidance has been incorporated into the development of a list of potential projects that will be circulated to local boards by 25 May 2020.

5. Local boards are now invited to provide formal feedback on the list of potential projects within their local area, including their view of which projects are the highest priority.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) delegate authority to <member> to provide the Board’s feedback on the list of local projects proposed as suitable for inclusion in Auckland Council’s application to the Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) Innovating Streets Pilot Fund (ISPF) by 12pm on 29 May 2020.

Horopaki

Context

6. On 3 April 2020, Waka Kotahi announced the ISPF, which supports council projects that aim to transition streets to be safer and more liveable spaces. The fund encourages the use of ‘tactical urbanism’ techniques, such as pilots and pop ups - interim treatments that can be delivered within a short timeframe to test and help demonstrate the value of future permanent street changes that make walking and cycling easier. Projects that Waka Kotahi aims to support include:

· temporary, or semi-permanent, physical changes to streets

· improvements that test a permanent fix and prototype a street design

· activations that help communities re-imagine their streets.

7. There are two application rounds for the ISPF:

· The first round opened on 3 April and closed on 8 May 2020. Successful applicants are expected to be announced in June 2020.

· The second round opens on 8 June and closes on 3 July 2020 with successful applicants to be announced by the end of July 2020.

8. Qualifying projects are expected to be delivered by June 2021.

9. In addition to the two funding rounds, Waka Kotahi is offering support for interventions that specifically relate to Covid-19. Auckland Transport (AT) is leading an emergency response programme in conjunction with Auckland Council and are applying for a funding subsidy for the costs associated with Covid-19 measures which are already being implemented across Auckland.

10. The selection process for round one was led by AT. Due to tight timeframes for submission, consultation was not possible. Twelve projects were submitted to Waka Kotahi for consideration. All these projects come from existing programmes previously approved by Auckland Council and align well with Governing Body and local board strategic transport priorities.

11. If these projects are awarded funding from Waka Kotahi, comprehensive stakeholder engagement will occur throughout the planning and delivery of each project, as per Waka Kotahi’s selection criteria.

12. For round two ISPF funding, a project team has been established across Auckland Council, AT and Panuku and a process developed to identify potential projects and take them through to a finished application.

13. On 8 May 2020, local boards were invited to contribute localised strategic direction and guidance regarding projects that may be suitable to submit for funding. This guidance has been incorporated into the development of a list of potential projects circulated to local boards on or before 25 May 2020.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The ISPF provides an opportunity for Auckland Council and AT to catalyse positive change across Auckland in line with Auckland Council’s strategic goals of improving walking and cycling options and creating more people-friendly spaces.

15. The techniques of tactical urbanism supported by the pilot fund represent an innovative change to the typical way in which projects are engaged upon, designed and delivered. Tactical urbanism entails piloting and testing key project elements on a temporary basis, that can generally be rolled out rapidly and at low cost. This constitutes a form of ‘engagement by doing’ and enables the relative success of ideas to be assessed before they are committed to more permanently.

Criteria for the assessment and prioritisation of projects

16. When providing feedback on the list of potential projects, local boards should keep the following criteria in mind, which will be used by the project team to finalise the list of projects to recommend to the Emergency Committee.

17. Prioritised projects will:

· improve transport choices and liveability of a place

· help mitigate a clear safety issue (related to Deaths and Serious Injuries at a specific location)

· be effective at:

o reducing vehicle speed (to 30km/hr or less), and/or

o creating more space for people on our streets, and/or

o making walking and cycling more attractive

· use temporary pilots, pop ups or treatments as a pathway to permanent change in the future

· contribute to more equitable access to opportunities and essential services, particularly in areas with low levels of travel choice

· support mode shift to low-carbon modes

· support Māori outcomes, i.e:

o adopt a design or project approach founded on Māori principles

o help advance Māori wellbeing, e.g. active Māori participation, improved access to marae, kura, kohanga, papakāinga, employment

· test key elements or is designed to generate community support for the ‘parent’ project

· be part of an existing planned and budgeted project (AC projects only)

· demonstrate the importance of the project within the current AT work programme (AT projects only)

· demonstrate ability to deliver

· demonstrate strong likelihood of project delivery by June 2021

· demonstrate co-design approach involving key stakeholders and community, including:

o support from the relevant local board(s) and stakeholders

o support from local community/stakeholders (e.g. business association)

· display clear process, including milestones, cost, monitoring and evaluation, and identification of risks and mitigation

· demonstrate value for money

· demonstrate opportunity to improve efficiency, or reduce risks associated with future permanent upgrades.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18. The transport sector is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the Auckland region with around 40 per cent of Auckland’s total emissions. Increased support and prioritisation of ‘no and low’ emissions modes of transport such as active transport, micro-mobility modes and public transport, will help reduce these emissions.

19. The interventions supported by the Innovating Streets for People pilot fund enable a reduction of transport emissions, which would support Auckland Council’s ability to achieve its climate goals and is well aligned with the draft Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Framework, and with the in-principle changes to this framework endorsed by the Environment and Climate Change Committee (resolution number ECC/2020/12).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. Auckland Council and AT are following an aligned approach for the ISPF submission and are working together to develop joint application packages.

21. Relevant parts of the council, including Ngā Mātārae; the Auckland Design Office; the Development Programme Office; Libraries; the Southern Initiative; Arts, Community and Events; Parks, Sports and Recreation; Plans and Places, and Panuku, have been engaged to prepare and collate funding proposals for the second round.

22. If a project application is successful, there will be a need to implement, coordinate and monitor the outcomes of projects that are funded by the ISPF. This would be jointly coordinated by AT and staff from across the Auckland Council family.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. Staff captured informal local board views earlier this month by inviting local boards to contribute localised strategic direction and guidance regarding projects that may be suitable to submit for funding. This guidance has been incorporated into the development of the list of potential projects.

24. The types of projects that Waka Kotahi seek to promote through this fund will have positive impacts on local communities in terms of the outcomes that are reflected in the assessment criteria.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. Māori are likely to benefit from interventions that support safer and more accessible active transport in Auckland. This is because Māori are over-represented in pedestrian-related crashes and tend to live in parts of Auckland where travel choice is poorest. To ensure these interventions benefit Māori equitably, they need to be complemented by meaningful access to active modes such as bicycles and micro-mobility devices, as well as supporting infrastructure such as secure bicycle parking outside main destinations.

26. The Innovating Streets fund encourages community-led interventions to transform urban spaces into safe and liveable spaces for people. There are opportunities to tap into the creativity and local knowledge of Māori communities in Tāmaki Makaurau to create urban interventions that address community needs and provide a strong sense of place.

27. Ngā Mātārae, the Southern Initiative and the Independent Māori Statutory Board have been approached for their input into the proposed project list.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The proposed high levels of funding assistance from Waka Kotahi (up to 90 per cent of a project’s value) will potentially result in savings for both Auckland Council and AT on any projects that may already have been planned and funded prior to the pilot fund application.

29. The funding provided by Waka Kotahi for piloting or testing of temporary interventions is likely to reduce design time and increase financial security for permanent improvements in the future. Trialling of real-life options for more permanent activities can also reduce or avoid potential costs associated with the redesign of interventions in case desired outcomes could not be achieved.

30. There are no financial implications for local boards arising from providing feedback on the list of potential projects, except for those projects proposed by local boards, and which they have proposed to fund themselves.

31. Local boards that submit an expression of interest for a project need to demonstrate both the ability to fund the temporary project and, if the project does not link to an existing AT, Auckland Council or Panuku funded permanent project, that the local board is able to completely fund the permanent project as well.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. There is a risk that Auckland Council may not be able to afford the local share of 10 per cent of the project cost needed to implement interventions under the ISPF, particularly given the present circumstances and the need to significantly amend the draft Annual Plan 2020/21. Note that while successful projects will require 10 per cent funding from council, they will bring the benefit of additional funding into Auckland. Similar financial constraints may also apply to AT and Panuku who are also potentially funding projects.

33. Another risk is the possibility that the implementation of successful Auckland Council projects under the pilot fund will not lead to the desired outcomes for Auckland. To mitigate this risk, staff have developed a set of assessment criteria for projects (see paragraph 17) to ensure strategic alignment with Auckland Council objectives before projects are submitted to Waka Kotahi.

34. Waka Kotahi’s Criteria 2: Ability to Deliver requires a co-design approach with community and key stakeholders in the development and delivery of projects. The possibility that unified community support for local interventions cannot be achieved through the co-design process within the required timeframe poses an additional risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35. Local boards are requested to provide feedback on the list of local projects proposed as suitable for inclusion in Auckland Council’s application to the ISPF by 12pm (midday) on 29 May 2020.

36. Each project will then be assessed against the criteria described above, and the project team will produce quality advice for endorsement from an Auckland Council committee.

37. AT projects will be presented to the AT Board on 3 June 2020 for endorsement.

38. All projects will be presented to an Auckland Council committee in early June 2020 following which, all interested parties will be notified whether their proposed project has been selected to proceed to an ISPF application.

39. Following this decision, further work will be undertaken to develop, prepare, and review each project that has been selected for submission to Waka Kotahi.

40. Completed applications will be submitted to Waka Kotahi prior to the closing date of 3 July 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead, Senior Policy Advisor, Local Board Services

Authorisers

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Relationship Manager - Albert-Eden & Orakei Local Boards