Agenda of Ōrākei Local Board

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 Ōrākei Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 17 September 2020, including the confidential section, 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

Part 13 of the Board’s set of Standing Orders 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 - Community Wellbeing Network - Ōrākei

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. Colin Rose and Terry Moore, representatives of Community Wellbeing Network - Ōrākei, will be in attendance to address the Board regarding the results from the Network’s community wellbeing survey which was distributed to most residents’ associations and retirement villages in the local board area.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank Colin Rose and Terry Moore for their 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 three minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum - Kristian Eek - Film Industry

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. Kristian Eek, Producer/Production Manager in the Film Industry will be in attendance to present on the importance and benefits of the film industry, particularly in relation to COVID-19, to hear any issues that the Board might have as a local stakeholder and discuss ways to work better.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the presentation and thank Kristian Eek 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.”

11 Notices of Motion

Under Standing Order 7.1, a Notice of Motion has been received from Member Troy Churton for consideration under item 19.

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport September 2020 monthly update report	11
b ⇩	Community Safety Fund Project CSFO1.9 - Abbotts Way, Remuera - Pedestrian improvements decision report	19
c ⇩	Community Safety Fund Project CSF01.4 Mt Carmel School Pedestrian Improvements decisions report	27
d ⇩	Allocation of Local Board Transport Capital Fund	33

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

St Heliers Library and community services

File No.: CP2020/12330

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To present findings from the investigation into St Heliers Library and community services provision.

2. To seek endorsement to restore and improve St Heliers Library through a planned implementation of maintenance, renewals, and upgrades.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The investigation of community services and facilities in St Heliers was an item on the Ōrākei Local Board’s 2019/2020 work programme (OR/2019/104) and a priority action in the Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP) action plan.

4. The St Heliers Library has been identified as earthquake prone.

5. We investigated the opportunities a potential seismic upgrade presents for the delivery of library services in the St Heliers area.

6. The investigation established:

· there is an ongoing requirement for library services in the St Heliers area and they are performing well

· the library is a valued part of St Heliers village and provides the community with access to the area’s heritage with opportunities to develop further connections

· the library is popular and at times struggles to accommodate peak demand

· the pressure on St Heliers Library’s services could be alleviated by neighbouring libraries that have capacity

· the library space is starting to look old and does not meet accessibility standards for customers or staff

· according to CFNP guidelines there is an under-provision of library services in the St Heliers area.

7. Acknowledging council’s strategic direction to move towards integrated facilities that deliver more than one service, we have also considered the neighbouring Tāmaki Ex-Service Memorial Hall. The hall is part of council’s venue for hire network and provides a large bookable space for community led activity.

8. We found that the hall is in average condition and there is adequate provision of bookable spaces in the St Heliers area. Due to the expiry of council’s agreement with the St Heliers Community Centre Trust in 2030, it would be appropriate to review provision in 10 years.

9. A range of service delivery options were considered to respond to the investigation findings including making changes to the existing library building and increasing provision.

10. Staff recommend that:

· a regular maintenance programme is implemented

· the approved renewal programme for the library continues, with a focus on the building’s heritage

· opportunities generated through renewals and potential seismic remediation are used to improve the library facility

· the use of neighbouring libraries is promoted to St Heliers library customers

· the impact of growth and changes in customer behaviour are assessed and community service provision levels are reviewed again in 10 years.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the St Heliers Library and community services provision findings report (Attachment A).

b) endorse:

i) implementing a regular maintenance and renewal programme that focusses on the library’s heritage value and improves accessibility

ii) investigating how to promote the use of neighbouring libraries to St Heliers Library customers

iii) reviewing community service provision levels in 10-years’ time.

Horopaki

Context

11. Investigating options for the provision of community services and facilities in St Heliers was an item on the Ōrākei Local Board’s 2019/2020 work programme (OR/2019/104) and a priority action in the Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP) action plan.

12. The CFNP and companion action plan provide strategic direction for the community facility portfolio. This investigation aligns with the CFNP’s key drivers to:

· ensure existing facilities are fit for purpose

· address shortfalls or duplication in provision and needs for community facilities

· meet current and future demand arising from population growth and changing user expectations.

13. The CFNP also outlines provision guidelines for library, venue for hire, and community centre services. Because both venues for hire and community centres provide bookable spaces, we have considered these two services together.

14. In early 2019, the St Heliers Library building was identified as earthquake prone. Seismic strengthening needs to be undertaken within the next 35 years (before 2053) or the building demolished.

15. As seismic remediation can present opportunities to incorporate other building improvements, we have investigated options to help inform future planning and decisions for potential seismic remediation.

Our approach

16. Community facilities and services require sustained investment over time. To enable us to meet community need and aspiration, we need to ensure we are delivering customer value from our existing network of facilities and services.

17. We have undertaken research to understand more about St Heliers Library and service requirements in the area. We have also considered the Tāmaki Ex-Service Memorial Hall.

18. The information we have analysed for this investigation includes population demographics, strategic plans, facility reports, previous research, and community engagement.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Key findings

19. Our investigation identified the following information and insights regarding library services in the St Heliers area:

· there is an ongoing requirement for library services

· they are performing very well (high utilisation and satisfaction)

· they serve a well-resourced population dispersed over a large geographic area

· they are very popular but staff struggle to meet demand at peak times

· there is capacity in neighbouring libraries to alleviate pressure on St Heliers library services

· there is an under-provision of library services in the St Heliers area according to the CFNP guidelines.

20. The library is a Category B heritage building and:

· is a valued part of St Heliers Village

· is in average condition overall

· is looking worn

· does not meet accessibility standards for customers or staff.

21. The investigations findings are reported in Attachment A: St Heliers Library and Community Service Findings Report.

Growth and demographics in the Eastern Bays

22. Our investigation identified that:

· the population is expected to increase by 14 per cent over the next 30-years, which is low compared to the Auckland region

· the growth rates of Asian, within the population, is expected to increase by 49.8 per cent while the Pākehā population remains similar to today. Pākehā will remain the majority ethnic group

· the number of retirees will increase by over 50 per cent in the next 20 years. Older adults are currently the largest age-group and remain the majority

· residents within the Eastern Bays area are predominantly well educated, older Pākehā, earning significantly more than the Auckland average

· St Heliers Library customers are demographically aligned with the area’s population.

Provision

23. It is important to consider population growth when looking at future provision. The population living in the St Heliers area is growing, but at a slower rate than many other parts of Auckland.

24. According to CFNP guidelines there is currently an under-provision of library space in the Eastern Bays area. The under-provision of library space is amplified due to St Heliers library above-average utilisation rates and will increase with the growing population.

25. Community centre and venue for hire provision is currently adequate according to CFNP guidelines, and the Tāmaki Ex-Service Memorial Hall is in average condition. By 2051, population projections indicate that there will still be adequate provision of community centre services.

26. Auckland Council and St Heliers Community Centre Trust (the trust) have an agreement for the trust to operate a community centre until 2030.

Options identified

27. We identified a wide range of options to respond to the investigation findings. All options propose the seismic remediation of St Heliers Library, at a time still to be determined.

28. To assess the options for service delivery we considered the following criteria:

· cost - capital and operational costs over the short-term and long-term for each option

· service improvement - the extent of improvement for service delivery

· strategic alignment - alignment with the CFNP guidelines relating to levels of provision, configuration of facilities, accessibility, and meeting future demand arising from population growth and change

· findings alignment – response to investigation findings.

Restoring and improving St Heliers library is the strongest option

29. An assessment of the options is outlined in Attachment B: Summary of options evaluation. A summary of the option assessment follows in Table 1 which shows option 2 offers the strongest alignment across the four criteria.

Table 1: Summary of option assessment

	Options	Cost	Service improvement	Strategic alignment	Findings alignment
1.	Status quo
2.	Restore library: upgrade facility through targeted renewal programme
3.	Increase library capacity: extend facility into adjoining car park
4.	Increase library provision: develop additional library facility
5.	Develop multi-purpose facility: amalgamate library and memorial hall

Alignment:
weak moderate strong

30. As outlined in the table below, staff recommend a staged approach to implement option two and revisiting option five in 10-years.

Table 2: Recommended approach

31. Benefits of the recommended approach include:

· the community retain a valued facility and service

· library’s heritage value is recognised through focused maintenance and renewals programmes

· library peak demand is managed through redirecting customers to neighbouring libraries

· additional time to consider investment for seismic remediation through implementing a renewals programme that does not immediately trigger further work to meet legislative requirements

· accessibility of the library entrance and interior are improved

· lower cost compared to other options

· if renewal work is delayed or seismic work is able to be initiated earlier, changes to the action schedule can be easily implemented.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

32. Maintaining our heritage buildings reduces carbon emissions through the reuse of existing building materials rather than through new and unrenewable building materials.

33. The approved renewals work programme provides opportunities to reduce energy consumption, for example, upgrading the HVAC system.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

34. The findings and options included in this report have been developed with input from a multi-disciplinary team. The team included members from Libraries and Information, Community Places, Service Strategy and Integration, Heritage, Panuku Development Auckland, Local Board Services, and Community Facilities.

35. The council groups most impacted by the recommendations in this report are outlined in The approved renewals work programme provides opportunities to reduce energy consumption, for example, upgrading the HVAC system.

Table 3: Responsibility for recommendations

Council group	Responsibilities as they relate to recommendations
Community Facilities	· Implement scheduled and response maintenance · Develop and execute renewal programme · Identify opportunities to improve accessibility · Seek support from Heritage on opportunities to represent the area’s history
Libraries and Information	· Promote the use of neighbouring facilities
Service Strategy & Integration	· Review community service provision, through the Community Facilities Network Plan, in approximately 10-years’ time.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. Customers and staff will benefit from improved accessibility within the library. Improved maintenance of the heritage aspects of the facility ensure the heritage value of the building remains for future generations.

37. At a local board workshop on 25 November 2019, staff presented findings and preliminary options.

38. The local board expressed interest in developing a multi-purpose facility on the current St Heliers Library site, through philanthropic investment.

39. Further investigation findings were presented to the local board at a workshop on 5 March 2020. These included:

· venue for hire and community centre service provision, in the St Heliers area, is adequate

· the St Heliers Community Centre have an agreement, with Auckland Council, to provide community centre services until 2030

· a multi-purpose community facility, at St Heliers village, would potentially decrease patronage at St Heliers Community Centre. Community centres are reliant on patronage for their income.

40. At the workshop, the local board signalled their support for the staff recommendation to progress option two.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41. The Māori population is 6.5 per cent in Eastern Bays. The population is expected to be stable, moving to 7.4 per cent over the next 20-years. One per cent of St Heliers Library’s active members are Māori compared to 13 per cent of Auckland Māori visiting libraries each month.

42. Mana whenua and Mataawaka have not been engaged as part of this investigation as it has predominantly been a desk-top exercise focused on understanding options and associated timeframes. They will be invited to consider how stories of local iwi can be told within the library, as planning begins on the heritage focused renewals programme recommended in this report.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43. Standard maintenance of St Heliers Library will be funded through Community Facilities’ operational budget. Maintenance requiring specialist sub-contractors, to maintain heritage value, will depend upon additional investment from council’s Heritage department or the local board’s discretionary budget.

44. Following the adoption of the Emergency Budget 2020/2021 $136 million of planned capital investment was deferred, resulting in a reduced programme of asset renewals and minimal seismic remediation of community facilities.

45. Regional funding of $2 million has been approved for seismic remediation as part of the Emergency Budget 2020/2021. If some of the funding is allocated towards the earthquake strengthening of St Heliers Library the remediation will be initiated with the programmed renewals.

46. Ōrākei Local Board has approved renewal funding of $20,001, as part of its 2020/2021 work programme and approved in principle $629,000 for 2021/2022 to 2023/2024 (OR/2020/75). Further renewal funding may be required, concurrent with seismic remediation, to complete the library upgrade.

47. All other project costs will be covered through department operational budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

48. The following table outlines the main risks and mitigations associated with the recommendations in this report.

Table 4: Risk identification and mitigation

Type of risk	Risk	Risk level	Mitigation
Strategic	If the population of St Heliers grows faster than expected then there is a chance that demand will exceed current capacity before provision levels are investigated again in 10-years’ time.	Low	Neighbouring libraries will be promoted to existing St Heliers library customers, to redirect patronage at peak times.
Financial	If seismic remediation costs are more than expected from the high-level estimates then additional funding will be required.	Medium	This risk is mitigated by seismic assessments being completed early to inform design, through good quality communication, and using quantity surveyor services at each phase of the project.
Financial	If renewal costs are more than expected then additional funding will be required.	Medium	This risk is mitigated though using the most up-to-date information available at each phase of the project.
Financial	If objections to the resource consent are received then additional funding will be required for legal fees.	Medium	This risk is mitigated through obtaining specialist heritage advice and working closely with the community.
Reputational	If communication is not clear and regular then community may feel uninformed and lose trust in the council.	Medium	Establish clear lines of communication Develop and implement an agreed communication and engagement strategy Ensure all project status information is accurate and up to date.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

49. Following local board resolution and consideration of any additional budget requirements, Community Facilities will implement immediate to medium-term actions, with support from Libraries and Information and Heritage. Long-term actions will be considered for inclusion in the CFNP Action Plan.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	St Heliers Library and community services findings report	47
b ⇩	Summary of options evaluation	69

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Hannah Alleyne - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and Integration

Mirla Edmundson - General Manager Libraries & Information

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

Approval for a new road name at 43-45 Benson Road, Remuera

File No.: CP2020/14558

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Ōrākei Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 43-45 Benson Road, Remuera.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names within the Board’s area. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation.

3. The developer and applicant, Bei Yue Limited, has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. Any of the proposed road name options would be acceptable for the local board to approve for use in this location, having been assessed to ensure that they meet Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. Mana Whenua were also consulted.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 43-45 Benson Road are:

· Marānui Lane (Applicant Preferred)

· Maunga Lane (Alternative 1)

· Maungaiti Lane (Alternative 2)

· Te Hākari Lane (Alternative 3).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) approve the name Marānui Lane (applicant preferred name) or Te Hākari Lane (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei preferred name) for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 43-45 Benson Road, Remuera in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60307793 and SUB60307796).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent BUN60307793 (subdivision reference number SUB60307796) was issued in June 2018 for the construction of fourteen residential units and one commonly owned access lot (COAL).

7. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the road requires a road name because it serves more than five lots.

8. Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachments A and B respectively.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the Local Board’s approval.

10. The Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines typically require that road names reflect one of the following local themes, with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

· a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area;

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

11. All four names were suggested by the Remuera Heritage Society and reflects the history of 43-45 Benson Road and the local area.

12. The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings are set out in the table below:

Suggested name	Meaning (as described by the applicant)
Marānui Lane (Applicant preferred)	The development sits on land that originally formed part of Marānui, a large house and property owned by Thomas Cheeseman, who for 50 years was the Curator Director of the Auckland Museum. The property fronted Benson Road, Upland Road, and Ōrākei Road with over 3 acres and had a very large garden of native trees and plants.
Maunga Lane (Alternative 1)	Upland Road used to be called Mountain Road. Maunga is the Maori word for ‘mountain’.
Maungaiti Lane (Alternative 2)	Maungaiti means ‘little mountain’.
Te Hākari Lane (Alternative 3)	Te Hākari means ‘the feast’ - The great feast of Remuera was held in 1844 near Rangitoto-iti volcano. This name is preferred by Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei as they strongly supported this feast by contributing copious amounts of kaimoana and vegetables for attending guests.

13. All the name options listed above are acceptable for use, having been assessed by the Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region, therefore it is up to the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context.

14. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use and not duplicated elsewhere in the region.

15. ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the road, as per the Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines.

16. Mana whenua were consulted in line with agreed processes and requirements – see the ‘Māori Impact Statement’ section of this report for more details.

Consultation

17. The Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines expect that there will be consultation with the local residents’ and business associations, local special interest groups, historical societies and mana whenua. A list of those organisations which may have an interest in the naming was prepared for the applicant. The applicant then consulted with the following groups:

· Remuera Heritage Society

· Remuera Resident Association

· Remuera Business Association.

18. The Remuera Heritage Society suggested all four of the applicants proposed names. These names were then forwarded on to the Remuera Resident Association and Remuera Business Association for their feedback.

19. Both the Remuera Residents Association Inc and the Remuera Business Association responded with their preference for ‘Marānui Lane’.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. To aid local board decision making, the Ōrākei Local Board Road Naming Policy and Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate, as well as a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications. Depending on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

24. On the 10 September 2020, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process. Representatives of the following mana whenua groups with an interest in the local area were contacted: Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust, Ngāti Paoa Trust Board, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Tamaterā, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Te Ahiwaru Waiohua, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Kawerau a Maki, Te Patukirikiri, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, and Waikato – Tainui.

25. Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara, Ngati Paoa, and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua all deferred their interest to Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei.

26. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei responded in support of the applicants third alternative name, however recommended adding ‘Te’ (The) in front of ‘Hākari’ to mean ‘The Feast’. They note that Te Hākari was significant to the history of the area and is a good example of Māori and the English settlers working and coming together for a magnificent and momentous occasion.

Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei also insisted on the inclusion of macrons over the ā in both words Te Hākari and Marānui. Macrons should be used to ensure the words mean what is intended.

The applicant has agreed to the above recommendations by Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and the names have been changed in the report to include the spelling corrections.

27. No other iwi provided responses or comments or suggested any other road name options.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by local councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site Plan for 43-45 Benson Road, Remuera	75
b ⇩	Location plan for 43-45 Benson Road, Remuera	77

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

Submissions and feedback on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020

File No.: CP2020/14621

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an overview of feedback and submissions received from public consultation on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires that each local board complete a local board plan for adoption by 31 October of the year following election and uses the special consultative procedure (SCP) to engage with its communities.

3. In June 2020, the local board approved a draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 for public consultation. The consultation period ran from 13 July to 13 August 2020.

4. A total of 432 pieces of feedback was received, including 327 submissions through the online survey tool, 95 hard copy submissions and ten pieces of feedback through social media.

5. Staff have prepared a report (Attachment A) summarising the results of the consultation. All feedback will be available on the Auckland Council website at https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Ōrākeiplan/widgets/299348/documents

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive submissions and feedback on the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020.

Horopaki

Context

6. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires that each local board must:

· adopt its local board plan by 31 October of the year following an election

· use the special consultative procedure (SCP) to engage with their communities.

7. On 13 June 2020, Ōrākei Local Board approved the release of a draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 for public consultation.

8. The key features of the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 were:

· The enhancement of the Pourewa Valley as a major, long-term project which will involve partnering with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, a number of infrastructure agencies, local schools and environmental groups and neighbouring property owners.

· Consideration of the effects of climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic on objectives and initiatives, particularly in relation to community, environmental and economic outcomes.

9. The outcomes of the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 were:

i. Our communities are connected, engaged and resilient

ii. Our land, forests, waterways and marine environment are protected, enhanced and restored

iii. All parks and open space areas are attractive and well-used places for both active and passive recreation

iv. Our transport infrastructure is efficient and connected, enabling people to move around safely and effectively using a range of options

v. Our town centres and local businesses are increasingly vibrant and prosperous.

10. In addition to understanding the needs and aspirations of the community, feedback was sought on how the local board can support the community and local businesses in recovering from the impact of COVID-19.

How we consulted

11. The consultation was held between 13 July and 13 August 2020. A range of engagement activities were undertaken to encourage the public to have their say, with a focus on digital and online platforms:

· Public submissions: These were hard copy and online collected via email, post, libraries, service centres, local board offices, People’s Panel and the online survey tool akhaveyoursay/lovelocal.

· Have Your Say: Face-to-face and Skype enabled engagement events (spoken interaction) were held on eight separate occasions between 31 July and 10 August 2020.

· Social media: Comments were received on the Ōrākei Local Board Facebook page.

12. The following community partners held events:

· the Auckland Chinese Community Coalition Association

· U.N.Youth New Zealand

· Youth of Ōrākei.

13. Due to the restrictions of the COVID-19 alert system on public gatherings, the following events were cancelled when Auckland moved to alert level 3 on 12 August 2020:

· The mana whenua and mataawaka engagement event co-ordinated by Hapai Te Hauora

· A drop-in workshop at Grace Joel Retirement Village.

14. In response to the consultation programme of publicity and events, the local board received the following feedback:

· 327 submissions through the online survey tool

· 95 hard copy submissions

· 10 pieces of feedback via social media.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of consultation feedback

15. The results and analysis of the public consultation will form the basis for the development of the final local board plan.

16. Staff have prepared a report (Attachment A) summarising the results of the consultation. The key messages of the report are described below.

17. The draft plan was generally supported with almost 80 per cent agreeing that it reflected the needs and aspirations of the community quite well or very well. While a few respondents thought the plan needed more detail, others said the plan was balanced and showed that the Local Board listened and understood the local area and its communities.

18. There was a lot of feedback in support of the environmental objectives of the plan, with strong agreement on the restoration and enhancement of the Pourewa Valley as a major focus for the Local Board and the community. Water quality in Hobson Bay and its catchment was a major concern, as was the water quality of many waterways throughout the Local Board area.

19. The plan’s parks and recreation initiatives were largely supported, as were the community objectives of fostering community inclusion and participation and working with local communities to enhance their areas through place-making. Respondents also agreed with supporting local businesses and improving the amenity and safety of town centres.

20. While there was support for extending the walking and cycling network and advocating more for alternative transport options, some submitters were critical that the plan did not go far enough in addressing climate change impacts.

Impact of COVID-19

21. 344 people responded to this question about whether the draft local board plan would help the community and local businesses recover from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. While 42 per cent indicated that they thought the plan would help, a slightly large proportion did not know. 15 per cent did not think the plan would help in the recovery from COVID-19 impact.

22. Many submitters expressed their appreciation of the natural environment, open spaces, the walking and cycling network during COVD-19 restrictions. Some stated they had realised the importance of these amenities, as well as local amenities and events, to community connectedness and well-being.

23. While many respondents did not know how the plan would help the community and local businesses recover, many believed it was important to support local businesses, community events, such as markets, and to look out for others.

Publishing the results of public consultation

24. To conclude this phase of the local board plan development, staff recommend that the local board receive the submissions and feedback for consideration.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. Receiving the submissions and feedback has a neutral climate impact. The submissions are available online to reduce the printing of hard copies.

26. The draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 reflected the impacts of predicted climate change. It considered such impacts as increasing temperatures, rising sea levels and changing rainfall patterns on the local board area.

27. The climate impact of any initiatives the Ōrākei Local Board chooses to progress will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements and project management processes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. Staff will work closely with the local board in the development of the final plan.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. The Ōrākei Local Board will consider all submissions and feedback to the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 prior to adopting the final local board plan in November 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30. The draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 was developed with consideration given to existing feedback from mana whenua and mataawaka. This included seeking their views and values in March 2020.

31. Events were held with Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei kaumatua and youth and feedback was collected at the end of each event.

32. 38 submissions were received from those identifying as Māori, which made up 22 per cent of the feedback received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33. There are no financial implications associated with receiving the submissions and feedback.

34. Budget to implement initiatives and projects is confirmed through the annual plan budgeting process.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. There is a risk relating to managing public expectations. The process of consultation is likely to have raised expectations as to the inclusion of the communities’ priorities and aspirations, while the full social and economic effects of COVID-19 are still being determined.

36. The local board will consider all submissions and feedback before making changes to the draft Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. The submissions and feedback are available on the Auckland Council website.

38. The Ōrākei Local Board will receive the Ōrākei Local Board Plan 2020 for adoption on 5 November 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Submission LBP analysis summary	83

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Suzanne Weld - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

Panuku Auckland Development- Ōrākei Local Board Six-Monthly Report 01 March to 31 August 2020

File No.: CP2020/14205

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Ōrākei Local Board on Panuku Development Auckland (Panuku) activities within the local board area and the region for the six months from 01 March to 31 August 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report is a record of events for the Ōrākei Local Board area during the stated time period. Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) are legally required to prepare six-monthly and annual reports containing financial and other information about their performance. By reporting clearly the record of events, this report enables the council, and Panuku, to meet its legislative reporting obligations and also satisfy New Zealand Stock Exchange obligations. No decisions are to be made from this report.

3. The Auckland Plan sets out, among other things, reporting requirements (statutory or otherwise), audit and risk reporting requirements, attendance at council meetings, and the process for buying, managing and selling assets.

4. Panuku collaborates with other CCOs, government and non-governmental organisations as appropriate to obtain positive outcomes for Auckland.

5. Panuku is charged with balancing our obligation to deliver returns for council with ensuring our regeneration projects are good quality, strategic and better for the environment.

6. The activities of Panuku cover four broad areas:

· urban regeneration of particular neighbourhoods, as determined by Auckland Council

· review of, and where appropriate, redevelopment of council non-service property

· management of council property assets including commercial, residential, and marina infrastructure

· other property related services such as service property optimisation (such as redevelopment incorporating a service delivery function), strategic property advice, acquisitions and disposals.

7. The Auckland Council Group (‘the council group’) is made up of Auckland Council, and five substantive council-controlled organisations (CCOs) of which Panuku is one. Panuku delivers core activities and plays a major role in achieving the council group’s strategic outcomes for Tāmaki Makaurau. The Governance Manual for Substantive CCOs sets out the council’s expectations for CCOs including Panuku, and the key policies that guide our activities.

8. Panuku has supported Auckland Council throughout its response to COVID-19 and continues to do so.

9. Throughout the alert Level 4 lockdown, our primary focus was to support our tenants and find savings across our organisation.

10. Our capital programme delivery was impacted by the Alert Level 4 lockdown, however, this resumed on the return to Alert Level 3, with only minor delays across our capital programme as a result.

11. Like Auckland Council, Panuku has made savings, with the majority of our people earning over $100,000, our executive leaders and our board taking voluntary salary reductions.

12. To respond to the changing property market and the impacts of the Auckland Council group we confirmed a new organisational structure to deliver our programme.

13. We have supported Auckland Council through the Emergency Budget 2020/2021. Our capital envelope for this financial year will allow us to deliver a credible urban regeneration programme in our neighbourhoods across the region.

14. Panuku Development Auckland currently have eight residential or commercial interests in the Ōrākei Local Board area.

15. No properties were purchased in the Ōrākei Local Board area during the six month reporting period.

16. No properties were sold in the Ōrākei Local Board area during the six month reporting period.

17. Two properties in the Ōrākei Local Board are currently under review as part of our rationalisation process

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) receive the Panuku Auckland Development- Ōrākei Local Board Six-Monthly Report 01 March to 31 August 2020.

Horopaki

Context

18. Panuku helps to rejuvenate parts of Auckland, from small projects that refresh a site or building, to major transformations of town centres or neighbourhoods.

19. The Auckland Plan is the roadmap to deliver on Auckland’s vision to be a world-class city, Panuku plays a significant role in achieving the ‘Homes and Places’ and ‘Belonging and Participation’ outcomes.

20. Panuku leads urban redevelopment in Manukau, Onehunga, Wynyard Quarter, Waterfront, Northcote, Avondale, Takapuna, Henderson, Old Papatoetoe, Ormiston, Panmure, Pukekohe, the city centre and redevelopment of the Haumaru Portfolio.

21. Panuku manages around $3 billion of council’s non-service property portfolio, which is continuously reviewed to find smart ways to generate income for the region, grow the portfolio, or release land or property that can be better used by others. ‘Non-service properties’ are council-owned properties that are not used to deliver council, or CCO, services.

22. As at 31 August 2020, the Panuku-managed non-service property portfolio comprises 1,674 properties, containing 998 leases. This includes vacant land, industrial buildings, warehouses, retail shops, cafes, offices, medical centres and a large portfolio of residential rental homes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

23. Panuku is contributing commercial input into approximately fifty region-wide council-driven renewal and housing supply initiatives.

24. Panuku works with partners and stakeholders over the course of a project. It also champions best practice project delivery, to achieve best value outcomes within defined cost, time and quality parameters.

25. Below is a high-level update on activities in the Ōrākei Local Board area:

26. 84-100 Morrin Road, St. John’s (4.3ha council-owned vacant site) - The architectural scheme has been completed, as well as the valuation of the site. An application for subdivision was submitted and approved and the draft title plan lodged with LINZ. Various development options are now being explored.

Properties managed in the Ōrākei Local Board Area

27. Panuku currently manages six commercial and two residential interests within the Ōrākei Local Board area.

Strategic Asset Optimisation

28. Service Property Optimisation is a self-funding development approach targeting sub-optimal service assets, approved in 2015. The process involves an agreement between Community Services, Panuku and local boards and is led by Panuku. It is designed to equal or enhance levels of service to the local community in a reconfigured form while delivering on strategic outcomes such as housing or urban regeneration, with no impact on existing rate assumptions.

29. Using service property optimisation, underperforming assets will have increased utility and efficiency, lower maintenance and operating costs, as well as improved service delivery benefiting from the co-location of other complementary services or commercial activities. Optimisation will free up a range of undercapitalised development opportunities such as air space, full sites, or part sites.

30. Using service property optimisation as a redevelopment and funding tool, the local board can maximise efficiencies from service assets while maintaining levels of service through the release of some or all of that property for sale or development.

31. Local boards are allocated decision making for the disposal of local service property and reinvestment of sale proceeds under the service property optimisation approach.

Portfolio review and rationalisation

Overview

32. Panuku is required to undertake ongoing rationalisation of the council’s non-service assets, including the identification of properties from within the council’s portfolio that may be suitable for potential sale and development if appropriate. This contributes towards Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget asset recycling target, as well as outcomes identified in the Long-term Plan, by providing the council with efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

33. Panuku has a focus on achieving housing and urban regeneration outcomes for properties no longer required for a council service use. Identifying potential sale properties contributes to the Auckland Plan focus of accommodating the significant growth projected for the region over the coming decades.

Process

34. Once identified as no longer delivering the council service use for which it was acquired, property is taken through a multi-stage rationalisation process. The agreed process includes engagement with council departments and CCOs, the local board, mana whenua and the relevant ward councillor The Finance and Performance Committee has the delegation to approve recommendations for disposal. Panuku works closely with Auckland Council business units, Auckland Council’s Finance team and Auckland Transport to identify and progress potential surplus properties to help achieve disposal targets.

Acquisitions and disposals

35. Panuku manages the acquisition and disposal of property on behalf of Auckland Council. Panuku purchases property for development, roads, infrastructure projects and other services. These properties may be sold with or without contractual requirements for development.

36. All land acquisition committee resolutions contain a confidentiality clause due to the commercially sensitive nature of ongoing transactions, and thus cannot be reported on while in process.

Acquisitions

37. Panuku undertakes acquisitions for Auckland Council’s parks team and Healthy Waters under delegation from council’s Chief Executive. Panuku does not unilaterally decide which properties to buy and when, but rather follows a directive to manage the commercial transactions following committee approval to purchase a particular property. A prerequisite of the committee resolution is reporting to the local board.

38. Panuku has purchased one property for open space across Auckland, in Flat Bush between March 2020 and August 2020 at a cost of $3.3 million.

39. No properties have been purchased in the Ōrākei Local Board area during the reporting period for open space.

Disposals

40. In the current reporting period from March 2020 to August 2020, the Panuku disposals team has entered into four sale and purchase agreements, with an estimated value of $5.4 million of unconditional net sales proceeds.

41. Panuku 2020/2021 disposals target is $24 million for the year. The disposals target is agreed with the council and is reviewed on an annual basis.

42. No properties have been sold in the Ōrākei Local Board area during the reporting period.

Under review

43. Properties currently under review in the Ōrākei Local Board area are listed below. The list includes any properties that may have recently been approved for sale or development and sale by the governing body.

Property	Details
9 Tagalad Road/6A Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay	The 5083m2 property is made up of two parcels and is formed as vacant bowling club greens and buildings. The parcels were acquired separately by the former Auckland City Council in 1933 and 1998. Both parcels are treated as reserves subject to the Reserves Act 1977. Following the bowling club ceasing its occupancy in 2016, the council’s Community Facilities department requested that Panuku investigate future service requirements or potential disposal. The local board has resolved that it does not support disposal and requested that staff investigate a proposed multi-sports facility should the site be retained as a service property. The results of a multi-sports facility assessment were reported to the local board in September 2018. Key findings were that the property's size, configuration and landlocked location limit its ability to accommodate other sporting needs. The lack `of passive surveillance/visibility and likely noise/artificial lights issues also contribute to not supporting a case for retention. In December 2019, the board advised it had requested that council staff explore other recreation uses for the property. Further Panuku engagement with the board is dependent on the conclusion of that investigation.

Property

Details

9 Tagalad Road/6A Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay

The 5083m2 property is made up of two parcels and is formed as vacant bowling club greens and buildings. The parcels were acquired separately by the former Auckland City Council in 1933 and 1998.

Both parcels are treated as reserves subject to the Reserves Act 1977.
Following the bowling club ceasing its occupancy in 2016, the council’s Community Facilities department requested that Panuku investigate future service requirements or potential disposal.

The local board has resolved that it does not support disposal and requested that staff investigate a proposed multi-sports facility should the site be retained as a service property.

The results of a multi-sports facility assessment were reported to the local board in September 2018. Key findings were that the property's size, configuration and landlocked location limit its ability to accommodate other sporting needs. The lack `of passive surveillance/visibility and likely noise/artificial lights issues also contribute to not supporting a case for retention.

In December 2019, the board advised it had requested that council staff explore other recreation uses for the property. Further Panuku engagement with the board is dependent on the conclusion of that investigation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

44. The Panuku urban regeneration programmes support the regeneration of existing town centres while also addressing climate mitigation and adaptation.

45. Mitigation of climate change involves reducing the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. Our neighbourhoods are transport-oriented communities that utilise existing infrastructure and transport links and we seek to make local walking and cycling safe and viable alternatives to the private vehicle. Panuku has also adopted a Homestar-6 minimum standard to ensure we can reduce energy, water and landfill waste. We are working to adopt similar standards for our public realm and commercial developments, whilst also taking guidance from precinct sustainability rating tools like Green Star Communities.

46. Adaptation to climate change involves planning for the changes to our climate and associated impacts that are already happening or are projected to happen, including sea-level rise, hotter temperatures, extreme weather events, flooding and droughts. Climate change is likely to subject the Ōrākei Local Board Area to hotter temperatures and more frequent flooding and drought. Panuku seeks to future-proof our communities by:

· specifying that infrastructure and developments are designed to cope with warmer temperatures and extreme weather events

· the use of green infrastructure and water sensitive design to increase flood resilience and provide ecological and biodiversity benefits

· the provision of increased shade and shelter for storm events and hotter days

· initiatives to build community resilience

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. The views of the council group are incorporated on a project by project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. Any local or sub-regional impacts related to local activities are considered on a project by project basis.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

49. Panuku works collaboratively with mana whenua on a range of projects including potential property disposals, development sites in the area and commercial opportunities. Engagement can be on specific individual properties and projects at an operational level with kaitiaki representatives, or with the Panuku Mana Whenua Governance Forum who have a broader mandate.

50. Panuku will continue to partner with Māori on opportunities which enhance Māori social and economic wellbeing.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

51. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

52. There are no risks associated with receiving this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

53. The next six-month update is scheduled for March 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Perin Gerrand - Engagement Coordinator
Authoriser	Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

Resource Recovery Network Strategy update

File No.: CP2020/14701

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an opportunity for local boards to give formal feedback on the Resource Recovery Network Strategy update (Attachment A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Resource Recovery Network Strategy, which was approved in October 2014, is being refreshed. This will respond to the updated Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan. It will also reflect the current global context including changes to global recycling markets and the impacts of COVID-19.

3. Key features of the strategy refresh include:

· expanding the current strategy from 12 community recycling centres in total to 23 facilities by 2031, including nine additional community recycling centres and two resource recovery parks (capital expenditure to be funded through the central government waste levy)

· seeking additional funding for ongoing operational support for community recycling centres beyond their current five-year contracts to enable continued service provision (to be funded through the waste targeted rate).

4. The aim of the network is to maximise diversion of waste from landfill, contribute to creating a circular economy, achieve wider social and economic benefits and deliver local green jobs. The network helps to drive the aspiration of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan to achieve a zero waste Auckland by 2040.

5. The Resource Recovery Network of nine community recycling centres has provided 80 local jobs. The network diverted 5,213 tonnes of materials from landfill in 2019/2020.

6. Central government funding has boosted the development of existing sites in the Resource Recovery Network. The revised Resource Recovery Network Strategy will build on this funding and enable greater accessibility for residents and businesses.

7. A number of local boards have provided support for the Resource Recovery Network through the funding of scoping and feasibility studies, assistance with identifying suitable sites and support for local initiatives such as education outreach.

8. Staff presented the key points of the strategy refresh to the Waste Political Advisory Group and local boards in September and October 2020. Formal feedback from local boards will be included in a report to Environment and Climate Change Committee seeking adoption of the updated Resource Recovery Network Strategy in November 2020.

9. Approximately $8.6 million spread over 10 years is proposed to fund new and existing sites. This funding will be sought through the Long-term Plan 2020-2031 process.

10. An additional $28 million for the new resource recovery facilities, spread over ten years, is proposed to be funded through the budget allocated to Auckland Council from the central government waste levy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Resource Recovery Network Strategy update (Attachment A of the agenda report)

b) note that local board feedback will be included in a report to Environment and Climate Change Committee in November 2020 seeking adoption of the updated Resource Recovery Network Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

11. The Resource Recovery Network is one of the nine priority actions in Te Mahere Whakahaere me te Whakaiti Tukunga Para i Tāmaki Makaurau – Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018.

12. The network was initially identified as a key initiative under the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012 and has been developing across the region since that time.

13. The purpose of the Resource Recovery Network is ‘to maximise the diversion of reusable and recyclable materials from landfill and, in the process, generate multiple environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits for Auckland’. The network helps to drive the aspiration of the plan to achieve a zero waste Auckland by 2040, taking care of people and the environment and turning waste into resources.

14. A 10-year strategy for the Resource Recovery Network was adopted in 2014 (resolution REG/2014/121). This strategy enabled the establishment of 12 community recycling centres across the Auckland region by 2024, funded by a combination of waste levy funding and targeted rates.

15. Community recycling centres provide communities with a ‘one stop shop’ for people to drop off unwanted goods and recyclables. The focus is on reuse, repair, repurposing and upcycling resources, as well as providing low cost retail goods to the community.

Progress of the Resource Recovery Network

16. As of September 2020, nine community recycling centres have been established. These centres are located in Waiuku, Helensville, Henderson, Wellsford, Warkworth, Aotea / Great Barrier, Devonport, Waiheke and Whangaparaoa. Community recycling centres are also under development in Western Springs and Onehunga.

17. Across the nine existing sites, 80 local full-time and part-time jobs have been created. In the 2019/2020 financial year, 5,213 tonnes of materials were diverted from landfill for reuse or recovery.

18. The development of the Resource Recovery Network in Auckland has been further boosted by central government Waste Minimisation Fund and shovel-ready funding, including:

· $2.3 million from the Waste Minimisation Fund was provided to support development of a Community Recycling Centre in Onehunga

· $10.6 million in shovel-ready funding for infrastructure development for the existing Devonport, Waiheke, Helensville, Warkworth, Wellsford and Western Springs community recycling centres as well as the Waitākere Waste Transfer Station/ Resource Recovery Park.

19. The recent central government shovel-ready investment will fast track the improvement of existing community recycling centres through developing fit for purpose infrastructure. It will expand employment by increasing the volume of materials and the number of related activities they can undertake to work towards zero waste.

Strategic context

20. COVID-19 continues to put pressure on international recycling markets, as countries restrict import and export activity through their borders. In addition to this, China implemented its National Sword policy in January 2018, which sets tight contamination limits on imported recyclable materials, including paper and plastics. As a result, global commodity prices for these products have dropped significantly as there is an oversupply to other existing markets.

21. Several strategic changes have occurred since the initial Resource Recovery Network was approved in 2014. These include the adoption of the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan 2020.

22. These strategic changes draw focus to the significance of the Resource Recovery Network, which is identified as a priority action in the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and is also an action in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan. The revised Resource Recovery Network Strategy will also feed into the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031 which is currently being developed for adoption in June 2021.

23. The opportunities for community recycling centres to divert waste from landfill, generate income and create local jobs are expected to increase significantly over the next few years as government policy changes come into effect. These include the increase in the waste levy, a container return scheme currently under consideration by the government, and the 2019 Climate Change response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act.

24. An overview of the revised strategy was presented to the Waste Political Advisory Group on 1 September 2020. The Waste Political Advisory Group indicated its support for the draft strategy refresh.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Key features of the refreshed Resource Recovery Network Strategy

25. The refreshed Resource Recovery Network Strategy provides a pathway for futureproofing and scaling up the network. In developing the strategy, the priorities, budgets and method of delivery from the original 2014 strategy have been reassessed.

26. The refreshed strategy focuses on five key areas:

· increasing the number of sites from 12 to 21 community recycling centres to provide more equitable access to all Aucklanders and establishing two commercially focused resource recovery parks, bringing the total number of sites to 23 by 2031

· supporting existing sites and operators to thrive

· strengthening and enabling the network

· developing a fit for purpose operating and governance model

· fostering financial sustainability.

27. Overall, the review has suggested that the strategy approved in 2014 is still valid. Two key changes have been identified that will require additional budget to enable the network to reach its full potential. These key changes are outlined below. Further detail is provided in the draft Resource Recovery Network Strategy update (Attachment A).

Increasing the number of resource recovery facilities

28. One of the key changes in the updated strategy is an increase in the number of sites planned. The original strategy proposed 12 community recycling centres. The updated strategy proposes an expanded network with an additional nine community recycling centres and two resource recovery parks. This will bring the total number of sites up to 23, including:

· 21 community recycling centres that are strategically located across Auckland. They will be connected with their local communities, providing trusted places to take unwanted goods as well as fostering local innovation and resilience.

· two resource recovery parks, which are larger-scale facilities that focus mainly on diverting commercial waste from landfill back into the circular economy, while also accepting and diverting domestic waste. One of these will be the upgrade of Waitākere Transfer Station to a resource recovery park and the second will be in south Auckland.

29. Staff anticipate that an appropriate site will be found in south Auckland for a resource recovery park. A resource recovery park in the south could provide an opportunity for economic transformation led by Māori or Pasifika businesses, social enterprises and local businesses. Studies have found that recycling results in around 10 times more jobs compared to sending materials to landfill.

30. The location of facilities will be determined by the availability of suitable sites, opportunities for joint ventures or partnerships, local board feedback, location of existing facilities and accessibility for Auckland residents and businesses. Centres will be equitably spread across the region, depending on the availability of appropriate sites.

31. Increasing the number of sites will enable greater accessibility for residents and businesses to maximise diversion from landfill and deliver further local green jobs.

Ongoing operational funding

32. Another key change in the updated strategy is the provision of ongoing operational funding for existing community recycling centres.

33. When the strategy was originally created in 2014, it was expected that the centres would become self-funding by the end of their initial five-year contract period. Revenue would be generated from income from gate fees, the sale of reusable and recyclable materials, and other services that the centres provide.

34. This intention was reflected by a reducing management fee from the council over the course of the centres’ five-year contracts. However, although sites that have come to the end of their contracts have significantly reduced their management fee from the council, they are not in a position to be completely self-funding.

35. This has been caused by a combination of factors, including sites not being developed as quickly as anticipated and the impacts of COVID-19. China’s National Sword restrictions on global recycling have also presented a challenge due to reduced revenue from recycling commodities such as paper, cardboard and plastics.

36. To ensure the on-going viability and impact of the existing sites, an ongoing site management fee from council will be required beyond the initial five years. This will be negotiated on a site by site basis and will be reassessed as the increase in the waste levy and introduction of product stewardship schemes come into force.

37. No additional operational funding is planned for resource recovery parks, which should operate as commercial ventures and be self-funding.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38. The expanded Resource Recovery Network is part of Action E6 in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan (manage our resources to deliver a zero waste, circular economy).

39. The Auckland Zero Waste Programme as part of Auckland’s Climate Plan estimates that this programme will reduce emissions by 39,650 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents per year by 2030.

40. Resource recovery facilities also provide zero waste learning opportunities which will have impacts on residents’ purchasing decisions, with resulting climate impacts.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

41. Waste Solutions staff have worked closely with Community Empowerment Unit and The Southern Initiative who have provided support the development of the community recycling centres. The Southern Initiative have also advocated for a resource recovery park in south Auckland as a contribution to the economic transformation for the south.

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

Local impacts and local board views

42. Several local boards have provided support and funding to enable the Resource Recovery Network through their local board work programmes. This has included funding for a range of initiatives from feasibility studies, local capacity building and waste minimisation and learning.

43. Local boards have also provided feedback through the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 development process. A number of boards supported the establishment of community recycling centres in their area, with Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manurewa, Ōtara-Papatoetoe and Papakura stating the establishment of a southern community recycling centre should be a priority.

44. Staff will engage with local boards on individual sites in their local areas as new facilities are investigated and developed.

45. Staff attended workshops with local boards between 15 September and 14 October 2020 to present on the key points of the strategy refresh.

46. This report presents the draft Resource Recovery Network Strategy and seeks formal feedback from the local board ahead of Environment and Climate Change Committee adoption of the strategy in November 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

47. Mana whenua and matāwaka were engaged in the development of the 2018 Waste Management and Minimisation Plan and identified priority actions for Māori.

48. The draft Resource Recovery Network Strategy aligns to a number of the Māori priorities that were identified, in particular:

· protection of Papatūānuku by keeping waste from landfill

· developing respectful and innovative partnerships for waste minimisation in order to restore the ‘mauri’ of Papatūānuku

· nurturing relationships, looking after people, taonga and taiao

· fostering mutual respect.

49. The council also partners with Para Kore ki Tāmaki – a Māori-developed and implemented programme that integrates mātauranga Māori and zero waste principles and practices to support marae, Māori organisations, Kura Kaupapa Māori and Kōhanga Reo to divert significant quantities of recycling and organic waste from landfill.

50. The draft Resource Recovery Network Strategy was presented to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Forum on 11 September 2020, and then at a workshop on 14 September 2020. As a result of the workshop a number of mana whenua identified interest in potential opportunities for engaging with the development of the Resource Recovery Network.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

51. The 2020/2021 net operating cost of the community recycling centres that are currently in operation is approximately $2.6 million per year. An additional budget of approximately $8.6 million spread over 10 years is proposed to fund new and existing sites.

52. Ongoing operational funding will mainly be provided through the solid waste targeted rate. Changes to the strategy will not result in any increase to the waste targeted rate until 2025 in order to maintain budgets during the post COVID-19 recovery and response phase. Any minor increases in operational expenditure over this period will be covered by waste levy funding from central government.

53. No operational expenditure is planned for resource recovery parks, which should operate as commercial ventures and be self-funding.

54. An additional $28 million in capital expenditure is proposed for the new resource recovery facilities, spread over ten years. The new facilities are proposed to be funded through the budget allocated to Auckland Council from the central government waste levy. The waste levy will increase incrementally from its current rate of $10 per tonne to $60 per tonne by 2025.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

55. The key risks and mitigations associated with the revised Resource Recovery Network Strategy are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1: Resource Recovery Network Strategy key risks and mitigations

Risk	Mitigation
Community recycling centres will not be able to become financially viable.	The increase in the waste levy will provide a greater incentive to keep resources out of landfill and increase use (and revenue generation) of community recycling centres. It will also provide increased funding to the council to establish new facilities. The introduction of product stewardship schemes, such as a container return scheme will provide additional revenue for community recycling centres and attract new users of the facilities. Additional operational funding provided as proposed in the refreshed strategy will support the centres until sufficient revenue is generated.
Suitable sites will not be available for the proposed additional nine community recycling centres.	Staff are investigating a wide range of opportunities to secure sites, including new models of ownership and operation. This could include joint ventures or lease arrangements.
There will not be suitable operators to tender for the operation of the community recycling centres.	Staff are undertaking early engagement in areas where community recycling centres are planned to build capacity and link interested groups to existing operators and the national membership body for community recyclers, the Zero Waste Network.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

56. Local board feedback will be included in a report to Environment and Climate Change Committee on 12 November 2020 seeking adoption of the updated Resource Recovery Network Strategy.

57. Budgets to deliver the revised strategy will be sought through the Long-term Plan 2020-2031 process.

58. The Resource Recovery Network will continue to develop over the next 10 years, with the Western Springs and Onehunga Community Recycling Centres expected to be operational by the end of 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Resource Recovery Network Strategy	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jenny Chilcott – Senior Waste Planning Specialist

Julie Dickinson – Principal Advisor Waste Planning

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - acting for Louise Mason, General Manager Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

Ōrākei Local Board

15 October 2020

Local board feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions

File No.: CP2020/14784

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To report approved Ōrākei Local Board input submitted for inclusion in an Auckland Council submission since the last business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its 16 April 2020 business meeting, the Ōrākei Local Board resolved to delegate authority to the Chairman to submit the Board’s formal views for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions to Central Government and other councils, where this feedback is due before a local board meeting as follows:

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) delegate authority to the Chairman to approve and submit the Board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, Parliament, select committees and other councils.

b) note that the Board can continue to use its urgent decision process to approve and submit the Board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, Parliament, select committees and other councils, if the Chairman chooses not to exercise the delegation sought in a) above.

c) note that this delegation will only be exercised where the timeframes do not allow for Board input to be considered and approved at a Board meeting.

d) note all local input approved and submitted for inclusion in an Auckland Council submission is to be included on the Board’s next meeting agenda for the public record.

3. Since the last business meeting, the Chairman has approved and submitted the Board’s input into the following Auckland Council submissions:

· The Ministry of Environment’s proposal, Reducing the impact of plastic on our environment – moving away from hard-to-recycle and single-use items

· The Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment’s proposal, Building for Climate Change.

Reducing the impact of plastic on our environment

4. On 12 August 2020, the Ministry for the Environment released a consultation document looking into options for reducing the environmental impacts of hard-to-recycle plastics and single-use items.

5. The Board provided input (attachment A) on the following two proposals due by Wednesday, 30 September 2020 to be considered by the Environment and Climate Change Committee for inclusion in the Auckland Council’s submission on the Ministry for the Environment’s consultation on hard-to-recycle plastics and single-use items:

· Proposal 1: phasing out hard-to-recycle plastic packaging made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polystyrene packaging, and all oxo-degradable plastic products.

· Proposal 2: a phase-out of specified single-use plastic items, including plastic straws and fruit stickers.

Building for Climate Change

6. On 31 August 2020, the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) released its “Building for Climate Change: Transforming operational efficiency and reducing whole-of-life embodied carbon” consultation papers. This is the first public consultation under its new Building for Climate Change programme, which is focused on the building and construction sector’s contribution to New Zealand’s goal of net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

7. The Board provided input (attachment B), due by Tuesday, 29 September 2020, to be considered by the Environment and Climate Change Committee for inclusion in the Auckland Council’s submission on the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment’s consultation on Building for Climate Change programme proposals “Transforming operational efficiency” and “Whole-of-life embodied carbon emissions reduction framework”.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōrākei Local Board:

a) note the local input approved and submitted by the Chairman on behalf of the Board for consideration by the Environment and Climate Change Committee for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions’ on the following proposals:

i) The Ministry of Environment’s proposal, Reducing the impact of plastic on our environment – moving away from hard-to-recycle and single-use items

ii) The Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment’s proposal, Building for Climate Change.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Board input on the Ministry of Environment’s proposal, Reducing the impact of plastic on our environment	123
b ⇩	Local Board input on the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment’s proposal, Building for Climate Change	127