Agenda of Papakura Local Board

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

October 2020: Auckland Transport monthly update to the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2020/15536

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. An update for the Papakura Local Board about transport related matters in their area, including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. No decision is required this month. This report contains information about the following:

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund.

· Auckland Transport (AT) local and regional projects and activities including;

- Supplier diversity programme

- Future Connect

- Rail track maintenance

- Slippery Creek Pedestrian Bridge

- Pararekau Road construction

- Proposed P90 parking zone at Papakura Town Centre.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport October 2020 monthly update report.

Horopaki

Context

3. This report addresses transport-related matters in the board’s area and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund and Community Safety Fund projects.

4. AT is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in the Local Board Engagement Plan. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

5. This section of the report contains information about local projects, issues and initiatives. It provides summaries of the detailed advice and analysis provided to the local board during workshops and briefings.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

6. With the Auckland Council’s emergency budget now confirmed the LBTCF for the 2020/2021 Financial Year has been set at $5,000,000 for allocation across the 21 local boards. Allocation will still be based on the Local Board Funding Policy. Decisions about the 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 Financial Years will form part of the Long-Term Plan/Regional Land Transport Plan discussions but early indications are that these years will also see a more constrained capital programme, than prior to the COVID crisis.

7. Advice from the Finance Department set the following criteria for the fund following the setting of the Emergency Budget:

· The $5,000,000 for 2020/21 will be split using the Local Board Funding Policy.

· A significant proportion of the $5,000,000 has already been committed to projects in progress.

· Currently, with budgets unknown for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 boards are unable to combine future years allocations into a single project.

· Local boards are encouraged to target delivery of smaller projects or complete design and documentation for a project that can be physically delivered in 2021/2022.

8. The Papakura Local Board’s share of the 2021/2022 allocation is $173,955. However of that, $90,000,000 is already committed to existing work, leaving $83,995 to be allocated in the 2020/2021 financial year.

9. Auckland Council has appointed a new project team to explore options for progressing the Greenway projects 12 and 13, given the current financial situation. This will workshopped with the board on 21 October 2020.

Community Safety Fund

10. The Community Safety Fund is funded from AT’s safety budget and is dependent on the level of funding AT receives from Auckland Council. This level of funding has been constrained through the Emergency Budget process.

11. Safety projects will be prioritised according to DSI (death and serious injury) data and therefore local board community safety projects will continue with planning and design but cannot be delivered in the 2020/2021 financial year.

12. A report on progress with these projects will be part of the November 2020 update.

Future Connect

13. Future Connect will be AT’s long-term plan for Auckland’s future integrated transport system. It maps Auckland’s Strategic Networks, the most critical links of our current and future transport system and will ultimately set a 30-year vision for all modes: public transport, general traffic, freight, cycle and walking.

14. Strategic Networks have been investigated to surface critical problems, opportunities and Focus Areas. This will help inform the development of the Regional Land Transport Plan (our 10-year investment programme) and will guide future planning and investment.

15. Future Connect was introduced to Local Board Chairs at the 14 September Chairs Forum. In October and November 2020, the project team will be available to talk to interested Local Board Transport Representatives. This will be an opportunity to provide a more detailed project overview, answer questions, seek local knowledge and opportunities for alignment with Local Board Plans.

16. On Wednesday 14 October 2020 AT will provide an overview of the forward work programme for the Papakura Local Board area. Through September and October 2020 senior managers and subject matter experts are providing a 90-minute update to all boards. This will be a high-level view of all planned works, including roading, maintenance, safety and passenger transport projects.

AT’s Commitment to Supplier Diversity in Aotearoa

17. AT is creating positive socio-economic change through our procurement activities by partnering with Māori and Pasifika businesses to deliver transport projects.

18. Supplier Diversity is a strategic and intentional business process that proactively engages, supports and enables businesses owned by indigenous peoples, minority ethnic groups, women and social enterprises to be engaged in supply chains. This is known as business to business (B2B) procurement. Its aim is to level the playing field, so these businesses have fairer access to customers and markets.

19. For the last five years, Auckland Transport has committed to Supplier Diversity and driving socio-economic prosperity through our Sustainable Procurement Programme. We do this by partnering with diverse businesses to deliver our transport projects. AT's Supplier Diversity and Sustainable Procurement activities have been possible through our partnerships with He Waka Eke Noa and the Ākina Foundation.

20. One recent Supplier Diversity success was through the Marae Upgrade Programme. AT upgraded an entrance, driveway and car-park at Makaurau Marae in Māngere. Not only did the project deliver a positive impact for the marae, and the environment, the project was completed this month by a 100 per cent Māori-owned business – Lite Civil Limited.

Local Updates

Rail Network Maintenance Issues

21. Members were advised of speed restrictions on all rail lines until KiwiRail can undertake urgent upgrades on the tracks. This means the maximum speed on the southern line is 40km and this adds 12 minutes on the journey between Papakura and Britomart.

22. AT introduced a new timetable on Monday 19 October2020, following track work on the Eastern and Southern lines, carried out by KiwiRail. At the same time, the Southern Line will be closed between Homai and Pukekohe for four weeks so KiwiRail teams can continue urgent work replacing worn tracks.

23. Earlier this year, testing revealed that about 150km of rail in the Auckland network needed repairing or replacing. In August 2020, a general speed restriction of 40km/h was put in place, forcing the frequency of train services to be reduced by half at peak travel times.

24. Since then, sections of network have been closed in four-week blocks so KiwiRail can replace the track more quickly than if done overnight or at weekends.

25. The speed restrictions can now be lifted on some sections of track that have been repaired.

26. Southern Line services will remain at a 20-minute frequency, however there are journey time improvements between Otahuhu and Newmarket. Onehunga Line services will stop at all stations, meaning more trains will be available for customers who board at stations served by both lines.

27. While KiwiRail undertakes the next section of track work, buses will replace trains between Manukau and Pukekohe. Southern Line services will terminate at Manukau station. This closure will be in effect from Monday 19 October to Sunday 15 November 2020.

Pararekau Road Construction

28. The Pararekau Road construction went out for tender in mid-August 2020, with the successful contract being awarded in mid-October 2020. Finalising the contract took a bit longer than anticipated.

29. This now means that construction is likely to begin in late October 2020.

30. AT have been made aware of concerns by the Summerset Retirement Village regarding access and safety. AT have been in contact with the village manager in relation to this and an initial meeting has been held.

31. Residents near the tree-works that are necessary for the start of this project have also been contacted.

Proposed P90 Parking Zone

32. Members of the board have been given copies of the parking plan for the Papakura Town Centre. The next step will be a further round of consultation.

Slippery Creek Bridge

33. For some time, there has been a concern about pedestrian safety near Slippery Creek Bridge on Great South Road. Following public feedback in September 2020, Auckland Transport (AT) will install a new footbridge.

34. The changes will include a new clip-on footbridge to the western side of Slippery Creek Bridge and a new footpath linking to the footbridge. A clip-on footbridge joins to the side of an existing bridge and is not a standalone bridge.

35. To provide space for the new footpath and greater visibility of pedestrians and cyclists, a bush will be removed from the berm outside Slippery Creek Reserve.

36. AT consulted with the public from 8 - 22 September 2020 and received 50 responses.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

37. Auckland Transport engages closely with Council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

38. Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

39. The impact of information (or decisions) in this report are confined to AT and do not impact on other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

40. The local board have been consulted on the following project(s) over the reporting period:

Auckland Transport Consultations

41. AT provides the Papakura Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in their area. The following projects were sent to the board for consultation during the reporting period:

a) The Brylee Ave engagement plan

b) The P90 Parking Plan for the Papakura Town Centre.

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

42. There are no decisions of the Traffic Control Committee affecting the Papakura Board area during the September 2020 reporting period.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

43. There are no specific impacts on Māori for this reporting period. AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

44. Our Maori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to with 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them.

45. This plan in full is available on the Auckland Transport Website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

46. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

47. Our capital and operating budgets have been reduced following the announcement of the Emergency Budget. Some projects we had planned for 2020/2021 may not be able to be delivered, which will be disappointing to communities that we had already engaged with.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48. AT will provide another update report to the board at the next meeting in November 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021, grant allocations

File No.: CP2020/14750

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received for the Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021.

3. The Papakura Local Board adopted the Papakura Local Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 22 April 2020 (PPK/2020/52) as provided in Attachment A to this report. The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants submitted to the local board.

4. The Papakura Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $217,972 for the 2020/2021 financial year.

5. At the 22 April 2020 business meeting, the Papakura Local Board resolved to allocate a grant of $2,268.05 for the Papakura Senior Citizens annual rates. This grant is allocated from the 2020/2021 community grant budget.

6. At the August 2020 business meeting, the Papakura Local Board resolved to allocate $2,500 to Badminton New Zealand (PPK/2020/136), from the community grants budget line.

7. $56,872.74 was allocated in the September 2020 Papakura Local and Multi-Board Grants Round One 2020/2021 allocations, leaving $156,331.21 for the remaining grant allocations rounds.

8. Fourteen applications were received for consideration in Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021, with a total combined amount requested of $24,890.10.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application received in Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021 listed in Table One.

Table one:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
QR2114-19	Youthline Auckland	Community	Towards the Papakura local board share of the Youthline Helpline annual costs.	$1,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-02	Community Publishing Institute	Arts and culture	Towards costs for poetry writing to showcase Papakura	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-04	Papakura Kootuitui Trust	Community	Towards costs for free fruit trees for the community to grow and share fruit.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-06	Te Maunga Kohungahunga Kohanga Reo	Community	Towards costs for an outdoor playground.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-07	The Conifer Grove Residents Association	Community	Towards the residents newsletter annual costs.	$900.00	Eligible
QR2114-08	Jagbir Singh Chahal	Community	Towards video editing costs, to showcase the Sikh community support for Papakura, during the Covid-19 lockdown.	$1,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-10	Papakura Toy Library Incorporated	Community	Towards the Papakura "Toy Library" annual operating costs for 2021.	$2,790.10	Eligible
QR2114-11	Papakura and District Historical Society Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards freight costs of the "Buller’s’ Birds" exhibition.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-12	New Zealand Warbirds Association Incorporated	Historic Heritage	Towards compliance costs for the "Warbirds on Parade" event in Papakura.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-13	Life Bliss of New Zealand Charitable Trust	Community	Towards food costs, advertising and poster printing for the "Rudram" counselling services in Papakura.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-14	Counties Manukau Gymnastics Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of a sandwich maker.	$1,200.00	Eligible
QR2114-01	Papakura Business Association	Community	Towards costs for the installation and take down of the “Anzac Day” flags.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-16	Everybody is a Treasure Charitable Trust	Community	Towards facilitation costs for the "Click Happy" photography programme for Papakura Youth.	$2,000.00	Eligible
QR2114-18	Interacting	Events	Towards costs for in-school tutors, a master of ceremonies, and workshop materials.	$2,000.00	Eligible
Total				$24,890.10

Horopaki

Context

1. 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.

2. Auckland Council’s Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

3. 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.

4. The Papakura Local Board adopted the grants programme for 2020/2021 on 22 April 2020 (PPK/2020/52) and will operate three small grants and two local grants rounds for this financial year.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. 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. Events and activities have been assessed according to this criterion.

10. The aim of the local board grants 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.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

6. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups with projects that support community climate change action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by 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

· decreasing use of single-occupancy transport options

· home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

· local tree planting and streamside revegetation

· education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

11. 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.

12. 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

13. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Papakura 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.

14. Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they can increase their chances of success in the future.

15. A summary of each application received through Papakura Local Board Grant Round One 2020/2021 is provided in Attachment B to this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

16. 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 grants processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

18. The Papakura Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $217,972 for the 2020/2021 financial year.

19. At the April 2020 Business meeting the Papakura Local Board resolved to allocate a grant of $2,268.05 for the Papakura Senior Citizens annual rates.

20. At the August 2020 business meeting, the Papakura Local Board then resolved to allocate $2,500 to Badminton New Zealand (PPK/2020/136), from the community grants budget line.

21. In the Papakura Local and Multi-Board Grants Round One 2020/2021, $56,872.74 was allocated, leaving an available budget of $156,331.21 for the remaining grant rounds.

22. Fourteen applications were received for consideration in Papakura Small Grants Round One 2020/2021, requesting $24,890.10.

23. Relevant staff from Auckland Council’s Finance Department have been fully involved in the development of all local board work programmes, including financial information in this report, and have not identified any further financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24. 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

25. Following the Papakura Local Board allocating funding for the local grants round one, council staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Papakura Local Board Grant Programme 2020/2021	25
b ⇨	Papakura Small Grants 2020/2021 - Applications (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Helen Taimarangai - Senior Community Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Request for alcohol ban extension at Papakura Train Station

File No.: CP2020/12945

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To extend the existing Papakura Town Centre 24 hours, seven days a week alcohol ban (existing 24/7 alcohol ban) to include the Papakura Train Station and surrounds.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable a decision on whether to extend the existing 24/7 alcohol ban to include the Papakura Train Station and surrounds. Staff have assessed the request against legislative criteria and identified three options:

· Option one: Status quo – no extension to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban (Attachment A to the agenda report)

· Option two: Extension – extend the existing 24/7 alcohol ban to include the Papakura Train Station and surrounds

· Option three: Amendment – decline request but amend the existing 24/7 alcohol ban to correct anomalies and to include any future carparks associated with the train station (Attachment A to the agenda report).

3. Staff recommend option three: Amendment. This option would correct anomalies and clarify the complicated and confusing boundaries of the existing 24/7 alcohol ban by:

· including the road at 18 – 22 Railway Street West, the Auckland Transport park and ride carparks on Ron Keat Drive and Railway Street West, and any future carparks associated with the train station

· providing consistent coverage of the road reserve.

4. This approach under option three: Amendment recognises that:

· there is insufficient evidence of a high level of crime or disorder at the train station or surrounds caused or made worse by alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds

· an amendment would help to reduce confusion resulting from the complicated boundaries of the existing 24/7 alcohol ban and enable a consistent approach to carparks associated with the train station.

5. Staff do not recommend option one (status quo) because there is an opportunity to amend the existing alcohol ban to correct anomalies. Staff do not recommend option two (extension) because there is insufficient evidence to meet the ‘high level’ legislative criteria.

6. If option three is adopted, there is a risk that council is perceived to be unresponsive to disorder incidents at the train station and surrounds. This risk can be mitigated by clearly stating the reasons for the decision.

7. The local board may also wish to consider assessing the effectiveness of existing and planned initiatives to address disorder at the train station and requesting a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment which may provide alternative solutions.

8. Staff will notify the requester of the local board decision and notify the relevant council department to install any necessary signage.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) adopt an amendment to the existing 24 hours, seven days a week alcohol ban at the Papakura Town Centre as shown in Attachment A of this agenda report, to correct anomalies on the alcohol ban map adopted in resolution PPK/2015/70. This amendment:

i) includes the road at 18 – 22 Railway Street West and the Auckland Transport park and ride carparks on Ron Keat Drive and Railway Street West

ii) provides consistent coverage of the road reserve.

b) approve the future inclusion in the alcohol ban in (a) any future carparks associated with the train station.

c) authorise staff as delegated by the Chief Executive to make amendments to the alcohol ban in (a) to correct any errors or typographical edits.

d) allocate up to $1,000 from the Papakura Local Board budget for the installation of new alcohol ban signage.

e) request Auckland Transport continue to monitor incidents of crime or disorder at the Papakura Train Station and surrounds caused or made worse by alcohol consumed at the Papakura Train Station and surrounds.

Horopaki

Context

Auckland Transport requested an extension to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban

9. On 30 July 2019, Auckland Transport requested an extension to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban at the Papakura Town Centre to include the Papakura Train Station and surrounds (Attachment B to the agenda report).

10. Auckland Transport leases the requested areas from KiwiRail, except for the Auckland Transport park and ride carpark on Railway Street West which is owned by Auckland Council.

11. The request aligns with Auckland Transport’s “no alcohol consumption” policy on all trains and at all train stations.^{^[1]}

12. Police and KiwiRail support this request.

13. The existing 24/7 alcohol ban boundaries and location of current alcohol ban signage in close vicinity to the train station and surrounds are complicated and confusing (Attachment A). For example:

· the existing 24/7 alcohol ban includes areas associated with the train station, such as bordering streets,^{^[2]} a walkway and footpath to the platforms from Railway Street West, the overbridge, and half of the Ron Keat Drive Auckland Transport park and ride carpark. The overbridge and carpark are part of the request.

· there are anomalies to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban such as exclusion of the road at 18 – 22 Railway Street West and of half of the Ron Keat Drive Auckland Transport park and ride carpark, and inconsistent coverage of the road reserve.

· alcohol ban signage is installed alongside some of the train station perimeter, which could imply that the train station and surrounds are part of the existing 24/7 alcohol ban.^{^[3]}This includes signage at the entrance to the Railway Street West Auckland Transport park and ride carpark despite there being no alcohol ban there.

Alcohol bans prohibit alcohol, are adopted by local boards and enforced by the police

14. Alcohol bans prohibit the consumption or possession of alcohol in specified public places during specified times.

15. The Papakura Local Board has authority to adopt alcohol bans in its local board area under the Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 (GB/2014/121).

16. A local board decision to adopt an alcohol ban must meet Local Government Act 2002 and Auckland Council Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 criteria (Table 1 and Attachment C to this report).

17. Police enforce alcohol bans using powers of search, seizure, arrest and $250 infringement fines. Police also have powers to address crime or disorderly conduct under the Summary Offences Act 1981 and Crimes Act 1961 whether or not alcohol is involved.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Staff assessed the request against legislative assessment criteria

18. Evidence provided includes eight incidents of disorder witnessed over a 17-month period and 53 requests for service to Police over a 19.5-month period with a documented link to alcohol.

19. There is little to no evidence however linking these incidents to alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds. None of the requests for service and only one of the witnessed incidents involved alcohol consumption there.

20. Staff have assessed the information provided in the request against legislative and bylaw criteria in Attachment D to this report, and provided a summary in the table below.

Criteria	Staff assessment	Met/Not met
Is there evidence of a high level of crime or disorder caused or made worse by alcohol consumed there?	Summary of assessment against criteria · no evidence provided of crime at the location – Police information relates solely to request for service calls · inadequate level of evidence of disorder at the train station or surrounds caused or made worse by alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds. Overall assessment · evidence does not meet ‘high level’ legislative criteria required.	û Criteria not met
Is the request appropriate in light of the evidence?	Summary of assessment against criteria · while incidents identified in evidence are of a type that could be prevented by an alcohol ban, evidence suggests an extension would be unlikely to prevent incidents at the train station or surrounds because little to no incidents at the train station or surrounds involved drinking there. · the effectiveness of existing or planned initiatives for the train station and surrounds are unknown. An assessment of the effectiveness of existing or planned initiatives and a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment for remaining areas in the request may be useful. Overall assessment · request not appropriate in light of evidence provided.	û Criteria not met
Is the request proportionate in light of the evidence?	Summary of assessment against criteria · to assess whether the request is proportionate in light of the evidence provided, the evidence must first indicate a high level of crime or disorder (see criteria above). Overall assessment · insufficient evidence to justify extending existing 24/7 alcohol ban.	û Criteria not met
Is the request a justifiable and reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms?	Summary of assessment against criteria · Police and KiwiRail support the request and in general the community (including iwi) are supportive of alcohol bans. · Auckland Transport already has a ‘no alcohol consumption’ policy on all trains and at all train stations · however – o evidence does not meet ‘high level’ legislative criteria required o there is insufficient information to determine benefits of extending the existing 24/7 alcohol ban and whether this will be effective or more effective than alternative initiatives. Overall assessment · insufficient information and evidence to be a justifiable and reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms to drink responsibly at the train station and surrounds.	û Criteria not met

Criteria

Staff assessment

Met/Not met

Is there evidence of a high level of crime or disorder caused or made worse by alcohol consumed there?

Summary of assessment against criteria

· no evidence provided of crime at the location – Police information relates solely to request for service calls

· inadequate level of evidence of disorder at the train station or surrounds caused or made worse by alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds.

Overall assessment

· evidence does not meet ‘high level’ legislative criteria required.

Criteria not met

Is the request appropriate in light of the evidence?

Summary of assessment against criteria

· while incidents identified in evidence are of a type that could be prevented by an alcohol ban, evidence suggests an extension would be unlikely to prevent incidents at the train station or surrounds because little to no incidents at the train station or surrounds involved drinking there.

· the effectiveness of existing or planned initiatives for the train station and surrounds are unknown. An assessment of the effectiveness of existing or planned initiatives and a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment for remaining areas in the request may be useful.

Overall assessment

· request not appropriate in light of evidence provided.

Criteria not met

Is the request proportionate in light of the evidence?

Summary of assessment against criteria

· to assess whether the request is proportionate in light of the evidence provided, the evidence must first indicate a high level of crime or disorder (see criteria above).

Overall assessment

· insufficient evidence to justify extending existing 24/7 alcohol ban.

Criteria not met

Is the request a justifiable and reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms?

Summary of assessment against criteria

· Police and KiwiRail support the request and in general the community (including iwi) are supportive of alcohol bans.

· Auckland Transport already has a ‘no alcohol consumption’ policy on all trains and at all train stations

· however –

o evidence does not meet ‘high level’ legislative criteria required

o there is insufficient information to determine benefits of extending the existing 24/7 alcohol ban and whether this will be effective or more effective than alternative initiatives.

Overall assessment

· insufficient information and evidence to be a justifiable and reasonable limitation on people’s rights and freedoms to drink responsibly at the train station and surrounds.

Criteria not met

Staff identified three options in response to the assessment

21. Staff have identified and assessed three options in the table below that respond to the assessment in Attachment D to this report:

· Option one: Status quo – no extension to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban (Attachment A to this report)

· Option two: Extension – extend the existing 24/7 alcohol ban to include the Papakura Train Station and surrounds

Option one: Status Quo

Option two: Extension

Option three: Amendment

Pros

Complies with legislative criteria.

No further limitations on people’s rights and freedoms to responsibly consume alcohol at the train station and surrounds.

Auckland Transport’s “no alcohol consumption” policy on all trains and at all train stations still promotes reduction of alcohol-related harm.

Supported by Police and KiwiRail.

Reduction of alcohol-related harm is still promoted by Auckland Transport’s “no alcohol consumption” policy on all trains and at all train stations.

Could help to reduce complexity and confusion resulting from complicated boundaries and close vicinity of existing 24/7 alcohol ban and alcohol ban signage locations to the train station and surrounds.

Could help reduce complexity and confusion resulting from complicated boundaries and close vicinity of existing 24/7 alcohol ban and alcohol ban signage locations to the train station and surrounds.

Inclusion of the entirety of the Ron Keat Drive Auckland Transport park and ride carpark is part of the request, which is supported by Police and KiwiRail.

Enables consistent approach to carparks associated with the train station.

Auckland Transport’s “no alcohol consumption” policy on all trains and at all train stations still promotes reduction of alcohol-related harm.

Cons

Ignores opportunity to correct anomalies in existing alcohol ban area.

Does not comply with legislative criteria.

Extension unlikely to prevent incidents at the train station and surrounds as evidence suggests no incidents at the train station or surrounds involved drinking there.

Insufficient information to determine benefits of extension and whether this will be effective or more effective than alternative initiatives.

Implementation costs in relation to signage.

Amendment unlikely to prevent incidents at the train station and surrounds as it does not include the entire area.

Implementation costs in relation to signage.

Risks

Risk

Reputational risk that council and Police are perceived as unresponsive to incidents at the train station and surrounds.

Mitigation

Local board could consider:

· clear statement of reasoning for decision

· assessment of effectiveness of existing and planned initiatives for the train station and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment to identify effectiveness of alternative solutions

· Police clarification of enforcement approach.

Risk

Same as Option one (Status quo), and –

While the risk of legal challenge is low, if a legal challenge were to occur there would be a high risk of success due to insufficient evidence of a high level of crime or disorder at the train station or surrounds, caused or made worse by alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds.

Mitigation

Same as Option one (Status quo), and –

Local board clearly states how it considers the legislative criteria to have been met.

The risk of legal challenge is considered low.

Same as Option one (Status quo).

Staff recommend an amendment to the existing 24/7 alcohol ban

22. Staff recommend option three (amendment). This approach recognises that:

· there is insufficient evidence of a high level of crime or disorder at the train station or surrounds caused or made worse by alcohol consumption at the train station or surrounds

23. If option three is adopted, additional signs will be needed. Staff recommend installing signage for clarity and effectiveness in particular:

· on the road at 18 – 22 Railway Street West

· at the entrance to the Ron Keat Drive park and ride carpark (there is already a sign at the entrance to the Railway Street West park and ride carpark).

24. Staff do not recommend option one (status quo) because there is an opportunity to amend the existing 24/7 alcohol ban to correct anomalies.

25. Staff do not recommend option two (extension) because there is insufficient evidence to meet the ‘high level’ legislative criteria.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26. The recommendations in this report have no significant impacts on climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. Decisions related to the alcohol ban over Papakura Town Centre may impact the operation of council units involved in alcohol ban signage. Council units are aware of the impacts of possible changes to alcohol bans and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. In 2015, the Papakura Local Board considered alcohol-related disorder around the Papakura Central Business Area (including council-controlled carparks) and decided to retain a 24/7 alcohol ban (PPK/2015/70). The alcohol ban was first introduced in 2008 to address alcohol-related unruly behaviour, litter, broken glass and vandalism.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. Managing alcohol-related harm increases opportunities for health and wellbeing and is consistent with the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. Iwi have been widely consulted on the use of alcohol bans in the past and have to date been supportive of their use.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. If the local board adopts option one (status quo), there is no cost to the local board.

31. If the local board adopts option two (extension), there may be a moderate cost for the local board associated with installing additional signage. Staff recommend a budget of $1,500 for at least five new signs and contingency costs.

32. If the local board adopts option three (amendment), there may be a moderate cost for the local board to install additional signage. Staff recommend a budget of $1,000 for at least two new signs and contingency costs, including signage for any additional future carparks.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33. If option three is adopted, there is a risk that council is perceived to be unresponsive to disorder incidents at the train station and surrounds. This risk can be mitigated by clearly stating the reasons for the decision. The local board may also wish to consider assessing the effectiveness of existing and planned initiatives for the train station and requesting a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design assessment which may provide alternative solutions.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. Staff will notify the requester of the decision. If the local board adopts option three (amendment), staff will notify the relevant council departments to install any necessary signage and update council’s website information.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Existing and recommended alcohol ban areas	37
b ⇩	Alcohol ban request	39
c ⇩	Decision-making requirements	49
d ⇩	Assessment of alcohol ban request	51

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Osborne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Good Food Road Map

File No.: CP2020/15437

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Good Food Road Map (Attachment A to this report) as the strategic framework to encourage consistency in approach, efficiency in the use of available resources and increase collaboration to develop local food systems in the Papakura Local Board area, that are regenerative, inclusive and resilient.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Good Food Road Map’s main purpose is to help develop and establish sustainable local food systems, so all individuals and whānau have access to good food in order to improve community health and wellbeing; where “sustainable local food system” is a collaborative network that integrates sustainable food production, processing, distribution, consumption, and waste management in order to enhance the environmental, economic, and social health of a place, ensuring food security and nutrition.

3. Adopting the Good Food Road Map supports the vision that everyone in Aotearoa New Zealand should be able to access good food at all times; where “good food” is food and beverages that are affordable, nourishing, appetising, sustainable, locally produced and culturally appropriate.

4. The action highlights from the road map are:

· Supporting communities’ right to nourishing food and drink.

· Supporting sustainable, self-determining, and mana-enhancing community participation in local food systems.

· Supporting food systems to reflect the diverse and multi-ethnic society of Aotearoa-New Zealand

· Supporting individuals and whānau to take control of their food and drink intake via a food system where the best choice is the easiest choice

· Supporting all levels of the food system to be resilient ensuring the supply of sufficient, adequate and accessible food to all, in the face of various and even unforeseen disturbances

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) adopt the Good Food Road Map (Attachment A to the agenda report).

Horopaki

Context

5. Papakura Local Board area and much of South Auckland are food swamps and/or food deserts. This means residents and its population have good access to bad food and bad access to good food.

6. Individuals and whānau in Papakura like many in South Auckland are suffering from diet-related chronic diseases.

7. One in five deaths can be associated with bad diet. The leading diseases associated with diet related deaths in New Zealand are coronary heart disease, stroke, colon and rectum cancer.

8. Those who live with diet-related diseases are more likely to experience poorer mental, social, and educational outcomes.

9. Community, non-governmental, and non-profit organisations deliver a number of initiatives tackling the food system, particularly around urban production and food environments. However, many of these initiatives face obstacles including policy constraints, funding constraints and lack of influence or access to decision makers.

10. There are also significant and complex underlying systemic issues that cannot be addressed by the community alone:

· loss of productive land

· unsustainable business practices

· waste reduction

· regulations that can lead to commercial interests favoured over community wellbeing

· fragmented approaches to addressing the food system e.g. multiple stakeholders with shared interests working independently

11. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen growing discussion around the critical resource of food. And while New Zealand has an abundance of food produced from its land and seas, like many nations it still struggles with food security within its communities.

12. The Southern Initiative and Healthy Families South Auckland have been working to help navigate the issue of food insecurity and food dependency long before the pandemic by mapping, researching, and developing alternative initiatives based on subject matter experts (SMEs) and community input. The lockdown period has highlighted the need for resilient local food systems that can deliver food security and food sovereignty back to our communities.

13. This is not an easy task due to the complexity of the food system. It requires different stakeholders working together, collaborating and co-creating to shift local food systems to better support our people, community, and environmental wellbeing.

14. The Good Food Road Map is a framework to help navigate this complexity, setting five targets as ideal scenarios towards food security and food sovereignty:

· Individuals and whānau should all be able to meet their basic human rights to nourishing food and drink

· Individuals and whānau should be able to participate in their local food system in a sustainable, self-determining and mana-enhancing way

· Our food system should reflect who we are as Aotearoa New Zealand

· Individuals and whānau should be able to take control of their food and drink intake

· All levels of the food system need to be resilient ensuring the supply of sufficient, adequate and accessible food to all.

15. The actions outlined in the road map are summarized in the table below:

1	Supporting communities’ right to nourishing food and drink	e.g Increase of healthy plant-based food consumption, which involves eating more fruit, vegetables, nuts, and legumes, and for many, less food from animal sources
2	Supporting sustainable, self determining, and mana-enhancing community participation in local food systems	e.g. Working with Iwi, community, businesses, public institutions and other organisations to develop a joint strategy for implementing these actions and achieving these goals inclusively and equitably
3	Supporting food systems to reflect the diverse and multi-ethnic society of Aotearoa-New Zealand	e.g. Working with local communities to revive and strengthen cultural food practices that are good for the people and the environment, and celebrate our unique diversity
4	Supporting individuals and whānau to take control of their food and drink intake via a food system where the best choice is the easiest choice	e.g. · Supporting urban/backyard food production and local/neighbourhood food collective/cooperative schemes · Talking with policymakers to ensure that schools, hospitals and other priority settings are supported to provide and promote healthier food as the default
5	Supporting all levels of the food system to be resilient ensuring the supply of sufficient, adequate and accessible food to all, in the face of various and even unforeseen disturbances	e.g. · Reducing food loss and waste through education and transformation of current practices. · Incentivising local food production and supply chain to increase local demand and consumption. · Supporting regenerative agriculture

16. By adopting the Good Food Road Map, Papakura Local Board is incorporating this framework as a strategic tool and an action plan to develop a resilient local food system, tackling the issue of food insecurity and food dependency with a realistic approach.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17. The Good Food Road Map is a strategic framework that incorporates five ideal scenarios which can be adopted and operationalise nationally, regionally and locally to achieve food resilience.

18. We recommend that the local board adopt the Good Food Road Map because it will help to strategically shift the conditions of systems change towards:

· Food equality

· Food sovereignty

· Food culture and traditions

· Food for health and wellbeing

· Food resilience

19. The Good Food Road Map be used by departments across council to inform and support their current work and identify future work programmes activities relating to food security and food sovereignty.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. There is an urgent need for developing local food systems that are regenerative, inclusive and resilient, understanding that food can play a critical role in driving systemic change and if produced, delivered, selected and consumed in a sustainable manner, it can improve individual and collective wellbeing, foster multiculturalism and social cohesiveness, build climate and community resilience, preserve and restore the natural environment, create jobs and regenerate communities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The Good Food Road Map has been shared, discussed, and include input from staff in Council Chief Sustainability Officer, Environmental Services, Civil Defense – Resilient Communities, Waste Solutions, and Healthy Families sites across New Zealand.

22. The Good Food Road Map has supported the strategic planning and is serving as a collective framework for the Healthy Families NZ Kai Community of Practice, and the newly formed Auckland Council ‘Food Community of Practice’.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. The Good Food Road Map was presented to the local board at a workshop in July 2020.

24. The Good Food Road Map aligns well with Whakaotinga 2: Tērā te iwi o Papakura te noho ngangahau, he piki te ora, he tūhonohono te ao. Outcome 2: People in Papakura lead active, healthy and connected lives and Whakaotinga 5: He manawapātia mō tōna taiao me āna taonga tuku iho. Outcome 5: Treasured for its environment and heritage

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. The Good Food Road Map is committed to working towards food sovereignty and Māori aspiration is at the heart of this goal. Consulting with local Māori is a priority and our team will work closely with board members, local community leaders and Council staff to ensure this happens.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. As a planning tool and strategic framework, there are no costs associated with adopting the Good Food Road Map.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. The Good Food Road Map is a plan to tackle local food insecurity, a proposal taking a realistic approach base on harnessing international experience and local knowledge, leveraging existing resources from different stakeholders, working together to influence the necessary policy and behaviour changes to achieve food security and ensure that food sovereignty remains in the control of our communities.

28. We have all the necessary evidence, facts and statistics showing how much people are physically, mentally, socially and culturally suffering from a broken global and local food system.

29. Considering the complexities within the food system and uncertainty of the ‘new norm’, the risk of doing nothing equals remaining with status quo, not challenging old paradigms.

30. This is almost an unmeasurable risk, especially for our rangatahi and future generations.

31. Adopting the Good Rood Road Map is an opportunity to mitigate this risk and start transforming the local food system.

32. As leaders and opinion makers, the Papakura Local Board can use this platform to tailor initiatives and support existing ones that can create a powerful movement towards a sustainable, equitable and reliable local food system, helping to mitigate the health, social, economic and environmental impact of food insecurity in our communities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. The South Initiative and Healthy Families South Auckland team will help the local board to implement the Good Food Road Map through liaising with community, internal council areas and external stakeholders when necessary, planning, advising and strategising if required, in order to create and build a resilient food system in the Papakura area.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Good Food Road Map	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Julio Bin, Lead System Innovator – Food Systems, Healthy Families South Auckland

Authorisers

George Makapatama - Manager Healthy Families

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Approval for a new private road name at 99 Porchester Road, Papakura

File No.: CP2020/14961

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 99 Porchester Road, Papakura.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state 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.

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, 99 Porchester Road Papakura Limited, agent Ben Harper of Surveyworx Ltd has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. The three proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming 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. Mana Whenua have also been consulted.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 99 Porchester Road are:

· Kura Crescent (Applicant Preferred)

· Ruia Crescent (Alternative 1)

· Kauhuri Crescent (Alternative 2)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) approve the name Kura Crescent (applicant’s preferred name) for the new private road, being a commonly owned access lot, created by way of subdivision at 99 Porchester Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60333556 and SUB60333558).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent BUN60333556 (subdivision reference number SUB60333558) was issued in May 2019 for the construction of nine residential freehold dwellings, one three-storey apartment building containing 17 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 commonly owned access lot requires a road name because it serves more than five units.

8. Site and location plans, and a street facing elevation of the apartment building of the development can be found in Attachment A to this report respectively.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.

10. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names try to reflect one of the following local themes, with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

· an existing or introduced thematic identity in the area.

11. Theme: The Applicant has proposed a theme that reflects the agricultural use of the land in the region and the rich fertile soils upon which the community was founded. Papakura is a Māori word believed to have originated from papa, meaning earth or flat (abbreviation of Papatūānuku) and kura meaning red, in reference to the local soils. This theme is reflected in the proposed names.

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

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Kura Crescent (Applicant preferred)	Te Reo Māori word meaning: ‘red’, relevant as this is the soil colour of the area, and where Papakura get its name from.
Ruia Crescent (Alternative 1)	Te Reo Māori word meaning: ‘to sow’ a seed, relevant as the area is known for its fertile soils.
Kauhuri Crescent (Alternative 2)	Te Reo Māori word meaning: ‘to dig, turn over soil’, relevant as the area is known for its fertile soils and agriculture.

13. All the name options listed in this report have been assessed by the Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet the Auckland Council Road Naming 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. ‘Crescent’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the commonly owned access lot, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

16. Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines. Road naming is an opportunity to recognise Māori cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land. The Guideline provides a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications. Commentary on the feedback received in this situation is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. To aid local board decision making, the Auckland Council Road Naming 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.

21. On 24 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 Tamaoho

• Te Ākitai Waiohua

• Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

• Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

• Ngāti Maru

• Ngāti Tamaterā

• Waikato-Tainui

• Ngāti Whanaunga

22. A response was received from Karl Flavell of Ngāti Te Ata who supports the applicant’s proposed names.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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 ⇩	Attachment A - Location & Site Plans - 99 Porchester Road, Papakura	77

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrea Muhme - Planner

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Approval for a new road name at 23 Butterworth Avenue, Opaheke

File No.: CP2020/15077

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 23 Butterworth Avenue, Opaheke.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.

3. The developer and applicant (DDL Homes) has proposed the names presented in the tables below for consideration by the Papakura Local Board.

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming 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. Mana Whenua have also been consulted.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 23 Butterworth Avenue are:

· Blooming Street (Applicant Preferred)

· Redoak Close (Alternative 1)

· Rangimārie Close (Alternative 2)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) approve the name Blooming Street (applicant preferred name) or Rangimārie Close (Ngāti Tamaoho supported name) for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 23 Butterworth Avenue, Opaheke in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60339470 and SUB60339472).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent BUN60339470 (subdivision reference number SUB60339472) was issued in October 2019 for the construction of sixteen residential lots 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 roads require names because they each serve more than five lots.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Auckland Council Road Naming 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. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria 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. The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings are set out in the table below:

Table one: Applicant’s proposed names and meanings

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Blooming Street

(Applicant preferred)

There are a few beautiful blossom trees that were once on the land and are still found around the area. This tree represents peace and is a nice pop of colour to the area. The name ‘Blooming Street’ pays homage to the trees that famously bloom in the local area.

Redoak Close

(Alternative 1)

‘Redoak’ combines the words ‘red’ and ‘oak’ from the two meanings below:

• The name Papakura is made up of two words ‘Papa’ which in Māori means earth or flat (abbreviation of Papatūānuku), and ‘Kura’ which in English means red.

• On 19 July 1919, the Reverend W.C. Wood planted an acorn (now known as the ‘peace oak’) in the Papakura School grounds as a contribution to the local peace celebrations.

Combining the two words ‘red’ and ‘oak’ as the street name links the concept of the significant name Papakura with the history of the area.

Rangimārie Close

(Alternative 2)

Rangimārie is Māori for quiet, peaceful.

The development reminds the applicant of a peaceful and zen environment. The name was chosen to represent this tranquility, as well as the new community being established in Papakura which is a lot safer and a more family friendly environment. By including the Māori translation of peace instead of using the English version, it helps to keep the Māori culture alive.

Furthermore, the area also has lovely scenery of greenery and natural beauty which corelates with the name ‘Rangimārie Close’.

12. All the name options listed in this report have been assessed by the Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet Auckland Council Road Naming 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.

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

14. ‘Close’ and ‘Street’ are acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the road, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

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

16. The applicant contacted Opaheke School, Papakura Rotary Club, and the Takanini Supreme Sikh Society NZ. Only the Opaheke School and Takanini Supreme Sikh Society NZ responded, both supporting the applicant’s preferred name ‘Blooming Street’.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. 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

19. 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

20. To aid local board decision making, the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent 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 in a manner and scale that they consider appropriate. Depending on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

21. 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 on 10 September 2020: Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Ahiwaru Waiohua, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Tamaterā, Waikato-Tainui, and Ngāti Whanaunga.

22. Ngāti Tamaoho responded, commenting their support for the applicant’s third alternative name ‘Rangimārie Close’.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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 - 23 Butterworth Avenue	85
b ⇩	Location Plan - 23 Butterworth Avenue	87

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Resource Recovery Network Strategy update

File No.: CP2020/15434

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 provided as Attachment A to this report.

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

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Resource Recovery Network Strategy update provided as 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 in 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 parks. A resource recovery park in the south could provide an opportunity for economic transformation led by Māori or Pacifika 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	97

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

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Submissions and feedback on the draft Papakura Local Board Plan 2020

File No.: CP2020/15476

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 Papakura 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. The implementation of COVID-19 alert levels forced a delay to the consultation period planned in June and July 2020 to be rescheduled to July and August 2020.

4. Every effort has been made to adopt the Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 in October, however the unavoidable change to the dates of the consultation period has required a small extension of time. This is to ensure the local board had sufficient time to consider the submissions received.

5. The Papakura Local Board will be adopting their local board plan on 11 November 2020.

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

7. A total of 682 pieces of feedback was received, including 96 submissions through the online survey tool, 566 hard copy submissions and 20 pieces of feedback through social media.

8. Staff have prepared a report (Attachment A to this report) summarising the results of the consultation.

9. All feedback will be available on the Auckland Council website at https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/papakuraplan/widgets/299388/documents.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

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

Horopaki

Context

10. 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.

11. The implementation of COVID-19 alert levels forced a delay to the consultation period planned in June and July 2020 to be rescheduled to July and August 2020.

12. Every effort has been made to adopt the Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 in October, however the unavoidable change to the dates of the consultation period has required a small extension of time. This is to ensure the local board had sufficient time to consider the submissions received.

13. The Papakura Local Board will be adopting their local board plan on 11 November 2020.

14. On 24 June 2020, Papakura Local Board approved the release of a draft Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 for public consultation.

15. The key features of the draft Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 were:

· A focus on maximising the metropolitan centre zoning status to boost the town centre and working with the board’s partners to create a prosperous local economy for all

· Celebrating diversity and supporting active healthy activities for all age groups

· A dedicated outcome around Māori identity and partnering with Māori to achieve their aspirations

· Advocacy to Auckland Transport for safety measures and options that meet community needs

· An emphasis on encouraging people to enjoy the environment including initiatives that support improvement in water quality of streams and the Manukau Harbour

· Working with community partners to achieve sustainability and a reduction in waste, including advocacy for a resource recovery centre in the south

· Encouraging and supporting the community to develop skills and capability to respond to the impacts of climate change.

16. The outcomes of the draft local board plan were:

i. Outcome one: A vibrant and prosperous local economy

ii. Outcome two: A community enriched by its diversity, where people feel connected and lead active, healthy lives

iii. Outcome three: A well-connected area where it’s easy to move around

iv. Outcome four: A treasured environment and heritage

v. Outcome five: A partnership with Māori that creates a Papakura where Māori identity, culture and aspirations are embraced.

17. 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

18. 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 5 August 2020.

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

19. Due to the restrictions of the COVID-19 alert system moving to level 3 on 12 August 2020 there was a delay in receiving the submissions from our community partners.

20. In response, the local board received the following feedback:

· 96 submissions through the online survey tool

· 566 hard copy submissions

· 20 pieces of feedback via social media.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of consultation feedback

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

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

Question	Overview of responses
Question 1: Response to overall plan	Overall, 47 per cent strongly agreed and 27 per cent mostly agreed that the plan reflected the needs and aspirations of the community over the next three years, while 4 per cent mostly disagreed and 3 per cent strongly disagreed. The remaining 19 percent were unsure.
Question 2: COVID recovery	Overall, 52 per cent felt the plan would help the community recover from the impact of COVID-19, while 11 per cent did not. The remaining 37 per cent were unsure.
Question 3: Prioritising Projects	The options are ranked below by how often they were selected: · 55 per cent Keri Vista Rise playground · 34 per cent Drury Sports complex · 32 per cent Smiths Avenue community centre · 28 per cent Prince Edward Park · 18 per cent Opaheke Park clubrooms · 12 per cent Hingaia Park play space and playground · 12 per cent Carisbrook and Keri Downs Park
Question 4: Prioritising Shared Pathways	The options are ranked below by how often they were selected as most important: · 72 per cent Linking Papakura to Manurewa · 19 per cent Linking Papakura to Drury · 9 per cent Linking Papakura to the Hunua cycle trail
Question 5: Other feedback received	Key themes of other feedback received included: - Alcohol Bans - Apartments - Climate change - Homelessness - Diversity - Events - Funding requests - Healthy food - Jobs / training - Promoting local - Safety - Scholarships - Smokefree / vapefree - Support families / businesses - Supporting local businesses - Environment - Waste - Cycleways / walkways

Publishing the results of public consultation

23. 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

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

25. The draft Papakura 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.

26. The climate impact of any initiatives the Papakura 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

27. 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

28. The Papakura Local Board has considered all submissions and feedback to the draft Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 and will adopt the final local board plan in November 2020.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. The draft Papakura 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 January 2020.

30. The following events were held with mana whenua (Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whatua, Te Aki Tai Waiohua):

· Southern local boards mana whenua hui held on Thursday 30 January 2020 at Ngāti Otara Marae

· Southern local boards mana whenua hui held on Tuesday 14 July 2020 hosted at the Manukau Civic Building.

31. 81 submissions were received from those identifying as Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34. 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.

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

37. The Papakura Local Board will adopt the Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 on 11 November 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of feedback on the draft Papakura Local Board Plan 2020	115

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Lee Manaia - Local Board Advisor

Shelvin Munif-Imo - Engagement Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Panuku Development Auckland - Papakura Local Board Six-Monthly Report 1 March to 31 August 2020

File No.: CP2020/14229

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Papakura 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 Papakura Local Board area during the stated time period. 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 manages nine commercial and residential interests in the Papakura Local Board area.

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

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

17. Eight properties are currently under review as part of our rationalisation process.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) receive the Panuku Development Auckland - Papakura 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 Papakura Local Board area:

Properties managed in the Papakura Local Board Area

26. Panuku currently manages seven commercial and two residential interests within the Papakura Local Board area.

Strategic Asset Optimisation

Service Property Optimisation

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

30. 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

31. 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.

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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.

35. 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

36. 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.

37. 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.

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

Disposals

39. 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.

40. The Panuku 2020/21 disposals target is $24 million for the year. The disposals target is agreed with the council and is reviewed on an annual basis.

41. No properties have been sold in the Papakura Local Board area during the reporting period.

Under review

42. Properties currently under review in the Papakura 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
84 Cosgrave Road, Ardmore	Part of a larger 11932m2 site acquired for stormwater purposes. Council's Healthy Waters department has advised the residual land not required for stormwater purposes will be available for sale. The timing and final area are to be confirmed at a later date. The site was included in Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. At its 16 July 2020 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee approved the disposal.
143 Keri Vista Rise, Papakura	A vacant residential zoned site that was originally acquired by the former Papakura District Council in 2008 for roading purposes. Auckland Transport has advised it is no longer required for this purpose. No alternate public work requirement has been identified for the property through the rationalisation process that commenced in May 2020. The site was included in Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. At its 16 July 2020 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee approved the disposal.
145 Keri Vista Rise, Papakura	A vacant residential zoned site that was originally acquired by the former Papakura District Council in 2008 for roading purposes. AT has advised it is no longer required for this purpose. No alternate public work requirement has been identified for the property through the rationalisation process that commenced in May 2020. The site was included in Schedule A of the Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. At its 16 July 2020 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee approved the disposal.
2R Keeney Court, Papakura	A 475m² unformed reserve that was vested upon subdivision with the former Papakura City Council in 1979. It is a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977. This site is not required as part of the open space network. The site was included in Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. At its 16 July 2020 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee approved the disposal. Panuku is undertaking a reserve revocation and plan change process before taking the site to market.
2 Popes Road, Takanini	The subject area is approximately 83000m2 of a larger 115371m2 site acquired for stormwater and transport infrastructure purposes in 2017. An existing Auckland Development Committee resolution exists to subdivide and dispose of the area not required for stormwater and roading purposes. The timing and final area are to be confirmed at a later date. The site was included in Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme.
72 Wood Street, Papakura	This residential property was acquired by the former Papakura District Council for a road alignment project. At the time of the acquisition, the former PDC resolved that any land that was surplus to the requirements of the project was to be sold. No alternate public work requirement was identified for the site through the rationalisation process that commenced in September 2019. The property was included in Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. At its 16 July 2020 meeting, the Finance and Performance Committee approved the disposal. Panuku is currently discussing with AT its transport infrastructure requirements for the proposed Papakura bus station reconfiguration before progressing.
36 Coles Crescent, Papakura	The at-grade car park was recommended to the Finance and Performance Committee in 2018. The committee approved the retention of this property for up to three years to inform strategic planning and a car parking review, and for the Papakura Local Board to pay the consequential operating cost associated with the retention of this property for short-stay parking.
26-32 O'Shannessey Street, Papakura	The at-grade car park was recommended to the Finance and Performance Committee in 2018. The committee approved the retention of this property for up to three years to inform strategic planning and a car parking review, and for the Papakura Local Board to pay the consequential operating cost associated with the retention of this property for short-stay parking.

Housing for Older People - Haumaru Housing

43. The council owns 1,452 units located in 63 villages across Auckland, which provide rental housing to low income older people in Auckland.

44. The Housing for Older People (HfOP) project involved Auckland Council partnering with a third-party organisation, The Selwyn Foundation, to deliver social rental housing services for older people across Auckland.

45. The joint venture business, named Haumaru Housing, took over the tenancy, facilities and asset management of the portfolio, under a long-term lease arrangement from 1 July 2017.

46. Haumaru Housing was granted community housing provider (CHP) status in April 2017. Having CHP registration enables Haumaru to access the government’s Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) scheme.

47. Auckland Council has delegated Panuku to lead a new multi-year residential development programme.

48. The following Haumaru Housing villages are located within the Papakura Local Board area:

Village	Address	Number of units
Coles Crescent	17 Coles Crescent, Papakura	7
Marne Road	14 Marne Road, Papakura	5
Marne Road	22 Marne Road, Papakura	5
Pahurehure Flats	14 Don Street, Papakura	24
Conifer Grove	12 Challen Close, Conifer Grove	10
Waimana Court	16 Waimana Road, Conifer Grove	7
Waimana Court	15 Waiare Road, Conifer Grove	14

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

50. 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.

51. 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 Papakura 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

52. 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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. 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.

55. Panuku continues to partner with Māori on opportunities which enhance Māori social and economic wellbeing.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. 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

Authorisers

Joanna Glasswell - Head of Corporate Affairs

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development six-monthly update to local boards: 1 January to 30 June 2020

File No.: CP2020/15432

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide local boards with an update on Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development activities in each local board area as well as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development’s regional activities for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To inform the local board about local/regional initiatives and how they are tracking.

3. The role of Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED) is to support:

· the growth of Auckland’s key internationally competitive sectors

· the provision of quality jobs across Auckland.

4. ATEED has supported multiple local board/regional initiatives that have supported economic development through development of businesses and an increase in events and sustainable tourism growth (including for Māori) across Auckland.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) receive the update from Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development for the period 1 January to 30 June 2020.

Horopaki

Context

5. ATEED has two areas of delivery focus:

· Economic Development – including business support, business attraction and investment, local economic development, trade and industry development, skills employment and talent and innovation and entrepreneurship.

· Destination – supporting sustainable growth of the visitor economy with a focus on destination marketing and management, major events, business events (meetings and conventions) and international student attraction and retention.

6. ATEED works with local boards, the council and other council-controlled organisations (CCOs) to support decision-making on local economic growth and facilitates or coordinates the delivery of local economic development activity. It further ensures that the regional activities it leads and/or delivers fully support local economic growth and employment.

7. Additional information about ATEED’s role and activities can be found at: www.aucklandnz.com/ateed

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. From 1 January to 30 June 2020, 3726 businesses had been through an ATEED intervention, including 3174 businesses for Economic Development-related programmes and 549 for Destination-related programmes.^{^[4]}

9. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns have seen a marked increase in demand for business support in both resource and monetary terms, cancellation and postponement of major events and significant fallout incurred by the tourism sector. Figure 1 shows the number of businesses in each local board area who have sought out an ATEED Economic Development and/or Destination intervention.

10. Waitematā Local Board had the highest number of business interventions, while Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board had the lowest. Because Waitematā Local Board includes the region’s CBD, it is unsurprising that it has had the highest number of interventions. The data shows that within a local board area, between 1 per cent and 4 per cent of businesses took part in an ATEED intervention.

11. Most local board areas had higher rates of participation in Economic Development-related programmes compared to Destination-related interventions over the six months. The following local board areas had Destination-related interventions of over 25 per cent:

· Waiheke

· Waitematā

· Rodney

· Māngere-Ōtāhuhu.

12. The businesses in these local board areas have high rates of Auckland Convention Bureau^{^[5]} membership and many benefit from ATEED’s tourism advocacy programme.

Māori businesses

13. Māori businesses are represented in ATEED interventions across all local board areas, with Waitematā Local Board having the highest intervention uptake. This is due to the high number of businesses in the Waitematā Local Board area relative to other local board areas.

Jobseekers in Auckland

14. During the April to June 2020 quarter, New Zealand experienced a rapid increase in the number of people who became recipients of a jobseeker benefit from the Ministry of Social Development. Jobseeker benefit data acts as a proxy for unemployment figures. The number of new recipients of the Jobseeker – Work Ready benefit from April to June 2020 can be compared for each local board area in Figure 3. Please note that the data from the Ministry of Social Development grouped together Waiheke and Aotea / Great Barrier local boards and cannot be separated for the purposes of this graph.

15. Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Henderson-Massey Local Board areas have the highest numbers of recipients in the second quarter of the year. Aotea / Great Barrier, Waiheke, and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards reflect the lowest number of recipients in Auckland. The number of recipients generally correlate with socio-economic status and population size.

Economic Development

Locally driven initiatives

Table 1: Locally driven initiatives
Local board	Initiative	Update	Budget
Albert-Eden	Sustainability Kick Start	Business participation: 10 Programme completed: March 2020	$24,000
Franklin	Hunua Trail Plan Implementation	Project reinstated after Covid-19 interruptions in Q4 with expected increase in project activity going into 2020/21.	$80,000
Hibiscus and Bays	Pop-Up Business School	Course delivered: 10-21 February 2020 Registrations: 57	$7500
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$3500
Manurewa	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$2000
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	Onehunga Sustainability Development Programme	First year of two-year project. First stage focuses on retail/services. Waste audits scheduled for April-June, however continued business participation in programme uncertain due to pandemic.	$20,000
Ōrākei	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$2000
Ōtara-Papatoetoe	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$3000
	Business Sustainability Follow-Up Programme	Programme launched mid-March, however continued business participation in programme uncertain due to pandemic.	$20,000
	Little India Promotion	The promotion part of Visitor Attraction Programme, launched in February. Programme put on hold in March due to the pandemic.	$20,000
Upper Harbour	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$2000
Waitematā	Sustainability Kick Start Programme	Business participation: 10 Programme completed: March 2020	$24,000
Waitematā	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$5000
Whau	Young Enterprise Scheme	Local board funds supported the Kick Start Days (February). Sponsorship Agreement signed. Expected draw-down of funds by 30 June 2020.	$1000

Supporting local business growth

16. A key programme in supporting the growth of Auckland’s internationally competitive sectors and the provision of quality jobs is central government’s Regional Business Partnership Network. This is delivered by ATEED’s Business and Innovation Advisors, whose role is to connect local businesses to resources, experts and services in innovation, Research and Development, business growth and management.

17. Three thousand and seven businesses participated in this programme from January 1 to June 30, represented below in Figure 4 which also breaks down business uptake per local board area.

18. Demand for business support increased significantly between March and June because of the fallout from the pandemic. To this end, programme coverage for the region ranged from 1 per cent to 2 per cent of all businesses in each local board area. Local boards with the highest coverage in percentage terms were Waitematā (2.1 per cent), Upper Harbour (2 per cent), Maungakiekie-Tāmaki (2 per cent), and Kaipātiki (1.8 per cent).

Other support for new businesses

19. Figure 5 shows the number of Auckland businesses that took part in ATEED’s business innovation clinics per local board area from January to June 2020. Local board areas with the highest number of participants were:

· Albert-Eden

· Kaipātiki

· Manurewa

· Ōrākei

· Waitematā.

20. As businesses refocus their efforts to cope with uncertainties arising from the pandemic, ATEED has reviewed one of its programmes with a decision for it to be discontinued - no workshops took place over the relevant six-month period. The ‘Starting Off Right’ programme gave free support and provided expert advice to new business owners and managers. ATEED is working on an alternative approach to support Auckland business start-ups and entrepreneurs.

Film activity

21. ATEED’s Screen Auckland team issues film permits for filming in public open spaces. This activity supports local businesses and employment, as well as providing a revenue stream to local boards for the use of local parks.

22. Between 1 January and 30 June 2020, a total of 246 film permits^{^[6]} were issued across Auckland. During lockdown, most filming activity ceased, however once the more restrictive alert levels were lifted in May, there was an increase in permits being issued.

23. Although Waitākere Ranges Local Board had the most permits issued (46), Franklin Local Board’s share of the permit revenue was the highest ($9921.74) from its 12 permits. Total revenue for all local boards was $45,342.49.^{^[7]} This information is shown in Figure 6 and Table 2 below.

Table 2: Film permits and revenue
Local Board	Film permits	Revenue
Albert-Eden	15	$2893.92
Aotea / Great Barrier	0	$0.00
Devonport-Takapuna	16	$3756.51
Franklin	12	$9921.74
Henderson-Massey	31	$3147.82
Hibiscus and Bays	18	$4066.08
Howick	3	$460.87
Kaipātiki	5	$1085.21
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	8	$2452.18
Manurewa	3	$252.18
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	6	$600.00
Ōrākei	8	$1017.39
Ōtara-Papatoetoe	14	$2782.60
Papakura	0	$0.00
Puketāpapa	4	$973.91
Rodney	26	$2817.39
Upper Harbour	0	$0.00
Waiheke	0	$0.00
Waitākere	46	$4860.87
Waitematā	30	$4210.34
Whau	1	$43.48
Total:	246	$45,342.49

Young Enterprise Scheme

24. The Auckland Chamber of Commerce has delivered the Lion Foundation Young Enterprise Scheme (YES) since January 2018. ATEED plays a strategic role and provides funding for this initiative. Through the programme, students develop creative ideas into businesses, complete with real products and services generating profit (and sometimes losses). During the period, there were 53 schools (1523 students) that completed the programme. This year, the programme took place mostly online.

Table 3: YES Schools
Local Board	Schools involved
Albert-Eden	Auckland Grammar School Diocesan School for Girls Epsom Girls Grammar School Mt Albert Grammar School St Cuthbert's College (Epsom)
Devonport-Takapuna	Rosmini College Takapuna Grammar School Westlake Boys' High School Westlake Girls' High School
Franklin	Onewhero Area School Pukekohe High School Wesley College
Henderson-Massey	Henderson High School Massey High School Waitakere College
Hibiscus and Bays	Kingsway School Whangaparāoa College
Howick	Macleans College Edgewater College Pakuranga College Saint Kentigern College (Pakuranga)
Kaipātiki	Birkenhead College Glenfield College Northcote College
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	Al-Madinah School De La Salle College King's College Māngere College Southern Cross Campus TKM o Nga Tapuwae
Manurewa	Alfriston College Manurewa High School
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	One Tree Hill College Onehunga High School
Ōrākei	Baradene College Glendowie College Sacred Heart College (Auckland) Selwyn College
Ōtara-Papatoetoe	Aorere College Ormiston Senior College Papatoetoe High School Sancta Maria College Sir Edmund Hillary Collegiate Senior School
Rodney	Mahurangi College
Upper Harbour	Albany Senior High School Hobsonville Point School (Secondary) Kristin School
Waitematā	Auckland Girls' Grammar School St Mary's College (Ponsonby) Western Springs College
Whau	Auckland International College Avondale College Kelston Girls' College

25. Figure 7 shows the number of schools participating in the Young Enterprise Scheme by local board area.

26. Higher participation in the scheme occurred in the following local board areas:

· Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

· Albert-Eden

· Ōtara-Papatoetoe.

27. This is mainly due to there being a higher number of schools in these areas.

Local jobs and skills hubs

28. The City Centre, Manukau and Northern hubs were all closed during lockdown and were open in June but with limited public-facing services. A reorganisation of the jobs and skills hubs services is underway in response to the impact of COVID-19 on the labour market and the funding received in the central government budget in May this year.

The South and West Auckland Prosperity Project

29. ATEED, the Southern Initiative (TSI) and the Western Initiative (TWI) have been working together on a project that is focused on how we can ensure that the mega economic shock of Covid-19 does not create further disparity and inequity for South and West Auckland, in partnership with Stakeholder Strategies. The presentation of the South and West Prosperity Project has been compiled using Auckland, South and West, Māori and Pacific-specific data, and includes a number of next steps for ATEED, TSI and TWI, and direction for the eco-system to enable prosperity for South and West Auckland.

Destination

Visitor survey insights report

30. The Auckland Domestic Visitor Insights Report was created to inform the Auckland tourism industry about the changing domestic visitor market to assist with improved product development and destination marketing. This report was released in May 2020 for the year up to January 2020. It contains insights that can be used to market regions and local board areas to domestic visitors. Relevant insights are captured below.

31. Central Auckland (Albert-Eden, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Puketāpapa, Ōrākei, & Waitematā local boards):

· The majority of domestic visitors surveyed (78 per cent) came to Central Auckland, with an average satisfaction of experienced activities and attraction of 8.2/10. The top three attractions were Queen Street, Sky Tower and downtown waterfront/viaduct area.

· Of the surveyed domestic visitors that came to Auckland Central (year to December 2019), the most popular activities were frequenting a restaurant/café (59 per cent) followed by shopping (55 per cent). Other activities included visiting the casino or participating in gambling (21 per cent) and attending an event, concert or festival (20 per cent).

32. North Auckland (Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays, Kaipātiki, Rodney, and East Upper Harbour local boards):

· Just under half of surveyed domestic visitors (43 per cent) visited North Auckland. Their average satisfaction with experienced activities and attractions was 8.2/10. Of these domestic visitors, the top attraction was Albany (30 per cent), followed by Devonport (27 per cent) and Takapuna (27 per cent). This group also visited Wellsford (17 per cent) and Whangaparaoa Peninsula (13 per cent).

· The most common activity undertaken by surveyed international (39 per cent) and domestic (50 per cent) visitors was visiting a restaurant/café.

33. East Auckland (Franklin (East) and Howick local boards):

· A third of surveyed domestic visitors (32 per cent) visited East Auckland. Average satisfaction with East Auckland’s experienced activities/attractions was 8.2/10. Almost half (46 per cent) of domestic visitors went to Sylvia Park, a quarter (24 per cent) visited Howick and 18 per cent visited Half Moon Bay. In comparison to the international market, domestic visitors called in on the Howick Historical Village (13 per cent) and the Pakuranga Night Markets (11 per cent) in greater numbers.

· Further, surveyed domestic visitors visited art galleries, museums, historic sites (10 per cent) in the region more than surveyed international visitors.

34. South Auckland (Franklin (West), Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manurewa, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, and Papakura local boards):

· Over half of surveyed domestic visitors (52 per cent) to Auckland visited South Auckland, with the average satisfaction with South Auckland’s activities and attractions being 8.0 out of 10. Over half of surveyed domestic visitors that visited South Auckland visited the Auckland Airport (53 per cent); a third (33 per cent) visited Manukau; and a quarter (26 per cent) visited Rainbow’s End. In comparison to the international market, surveyed domestic visitors visited the Ōtara Market (13 per cent) and Ōtara (10 per cent) in greater numbers.

· Of the visitors that visited South Auckland, the top three activities for surveyed international and domestic visitors was visiting a restaurant or café, shopping and general exploration.

35. West Auckland (Henderson-Massey, West Upper Harbour, Waitākere Ranges, and Whau local boards):

· Over a third of surveyed domestic visitors (35 per cent) to Auckland visited West Auckland. The average satisfaction with West Auckland’s activities and attractions for the international market was 8.2 out of 10. A third of the surveyed domestic visitors who visited West Auckland went to Piha Beach (34 per cent); 20 per cent visited Titirangi; and 19 per cent visited the Avondale Sunday Markets. In comparison to the international market, domestic visitors visited the Kumeu Farmers’ Market (14 per cent) and Parakai Hot Pools (13 per cent) more often.

· Visiting a restaurant or café, shopping and going to the beach were the top three domestic visitor activities.

36. Hauraki Gulf Islands (Aotea / Great Barrier and Waiheke local boards):

· 20 per cent of surveyed domestic visitors to Auckland visited Hauraki Gulf Islands. Average satisfaction with the area’s experienced activities/attractions was 8.5/10 (highest satisfaction rating from the domestic market). The top domestic visitor attraction was Waiheke Island (44 per cent), followed by Rangitoto Island (18 per cent) and Onetangi Bay on Waiheke Island (18 per cent). In comparison to the international market, domestic visitors visited the Kaitoke Hot Springs on Great Barrier Island (12 per cent) and Whittaker’s Musical Museum on Waiheke Island (11 per cent) in greater numbers.

· The top three activities for surveyed domestic visitors was visiting a restaurant (33 per cent), general exploration (24 per cent) and sightseeing (22 per cent). Visiting wineries/breweries was a common activity cited by both international and domestic markets and was unique to the Hauraki Gulf Islands.

Local board destination management and marketing activities

37. During the six months to July 2020, there were a number of tourism-related ATEED interventions in each of the local board areas, including:

· Spring Campaign: Number of businsses promoted and supported through a multi-platform campaign to drive domestic visitation and spend in the spring off-season in Auckland.

· Tourism Advocacy: Number of businesses promoted for example in:

o offshore trade events

o trade shows

o marketing material

o broadcasts

o social media

o specific campaign content.

· Tourism Destination Development/Innovation: Tourism business capability building through coaching and facilitation. This includes one-on-one advice from ATEED Tourism team members for new and existing Auckland businesses.

· Tourism Famils (familiarisation trips for travel agents or media): Number of businesses who benefited from agent famils (ATEED links tourism operators to travel agents which results in bookings being made with the operators) and media famils (ATEED facilitated media files/hosting media to showcase tourism products).

38. Figure 8 below shows the number of Auckland businesses in local board areas (excluding Rodney and Waitematā local boards) involved in an ATEED tourism intervention (January-June 2020). Figure 9 depicts the number of Auckland businesses in the Albert-Eden, Rodney and Waitematā local board areas involved in an ATEED tourism intervention for the same period of time.

39. Waitematā and Rodney Local Boards are excluded from Figure 8 to allow for intervention participation scales of the other local boards to be appreciated without distraction. Instead, Waitematā and Rodney local boards are depicted in Figure 9 and compared to the Albert-Eden Local Board to highlight a much larger uptake of interventions by businesses in the two previously mentioned local board areas.

40. The reason for the difference in scale amongst the identified boards is because Waitematā includes the region’s central business district – it is therefore unsurprising that it maintains the highest number of business interventions.

41. Specific tourism interventions in the period included the Nau Mai multi-media content series in collaboration with New Zealand Media and Entertainment, which saw ambassadors promoting their favourite places in Auckland including where they love to eat, shop and go on ‘staycations’. These stories were aimed at encouraging Aucklanders to experience and explore their own region and targeted and encouraged other regions in the upper North Island to come and visit Auckland. Ambassadors mentioned attractions such as cafés, walks, beaches, parks, venues from the Matakana Farmers’ Market in Rodney Local Board to Castaways Resort on the west coast in Franklin Local Board, Ambury Farm in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board and Waiheke Island’s Oyster Inn.

42. In March, the ‘Journeys North’ project in collaboration with Northland Inc saw the development of ‘Auckland Journeys’ offering visitors richer and easier journeys in the region to enjoy. Promoted locations included:

· Puhoi to Pakiri in Rodney

· Auckland Airport to Wellsford through Waitākere and Kumeu in the Waitākere Ranges

· Rodney.

43. ‘Famils’ are a means of promoting Auckland to influential international travel sellers, and prior to March hosted guests from the United States. Orewa and Waiheke Island were profiled in Air New Zealand’s in-flight magazine. Two episodes of Emmy award-winning US Travel show Samantha Brown’s Places to Love which focused on marketing Auckland to domestic and overseas viewers aired in January with an advertising spend rate of NZ$2.1 million per episode, and a reach of 700,000+ people per episode. Samantha enjoyed sailing in the Waitematā Harbour, eating and drinking in the city’s centre, hiking with a local Māori guide in the Parnell Domain, and taking a surf lesson at Piha beach.

Examples of separate local board area activities include:

44. Aotea / Great Barrier Local Board – Direct/indirect marketing activity increased in late June/July including:

· Surfer Today articulating the best surf spots in New Zealand featuring the Great Barrier Island.

· Stuff.co.nz published an article detailing the successes of Aotea / Great Barrier Island and other small towns, in terms of recovery from the pandemic.

· New Zealand Herald in an article about the ‘Life on Great Barrier Island: Local remedies led to thriving Māori health business’ and other articles (‘Off the Beaten Track’ and ‘The Best of Great Barrier’) promoting Aotea / Great Barrier Island as a great place for domestic tourists to visit.

· Radio New Zealand interviewed the owner of Great Barrier Island’s ‘The Curragh’ to talk about the upswing in domestic tourism after lockdown.

· ATEED will continue to play a supportive and facilitative role for tourism product development in the region to help raise the profile of Auckland as a destination.

45. Devonport-Takapuna Local Board – Devonport, Takapuna and Milford Business Improvement Districts were supported via the marketing activity of Explore North Shore – a digital site encouraging visitation and activity into the North Shore. Takapuna Beach Business Association received a grant from the local board for providing highly targeted and relevant tactics for businesses impacted by the Hurstmere Road infrastructure upgrade. The grant is endorsed and managed by ATEED.

46. Franklin Local Board – Ongoing support to the East Auckland Tourism Group and the Franklin Tourism Group through regular attendance at board meeting and important events, working with ATEED and leveraging this relationship for mutual benefit across marketing and product opportunities, and working with individual operators on product development for example the continuing development of the Hunua Trail and the Glenbrook Vintage Railway. Additionally, there was a focus on ongoing work with the development of Clevedon as a destination.

47. Howick Local Board – Continued engagement and strategy sessions through the ATEED Tourism Innovation team and South Auckland tourism clusters as well as managing an increased Howick Local Board grant to East Auckland Tourism development.

48. Rodney Local Board – Initiated multi-linked support for Aotea Organics in Rodney, which is one of the oldest organic farms in New Zealand. Multi-linked means that ATEED has a very large suite of products and services it can offer businesses, in this case ATEED was able to establish links and actions for tourism; inclusion in the travel maps, identification of event hosting, and research and development activity.

49. Waiheke Local Board – Collaboration with the Waiheke Island Tourism Group and other key stakeholders on the sustainable future of tourism for the island.

Māori Tourism Development Activity

50. ATEED worked with 45 Māori businesses in the tourism and 23 Māori businesses on the Māori and Iwi Tourism Development programme. Table 4 details the number of Maori tourism businesses by local board area:

Table 4: Māori Tourism businesses
Local board	Māori businesses	Māori and Iwi tourism development businesses
Albert-Eden	4	3
Aotea / Great Barrier	1	1
Henderson-Massey	4	4
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	5	2
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	1	1
Orākei	2	1
Rodney	4	3
Waiheke	1	-
Waitākere Ranges	4	1
Waitematā	18	7
Whau	1	-

51. Waitematā Local Board had the most Māori businesses involved in an ATEED tourism intervention, once again, owing to its inclusion of the CBD and being a top tourist destination. Just under half of local boards are not included in this table because no businesses that were involved in an ATEED tourism intervention were identified as Māori.

52. The Māori Tourism Innovation Partnership Programme has been established to enable ATEED to work collaboratively with the tourism industry to support the sustainable growth of tourism within Tāmaki Makaurau The programme aims to grow and strengthen the Auckland visitor economy by supporting iwi, hapū, marae, Māori Trusts, Urban Māori Authorities and Māori Tourism collectives within the region, and to aid the development of new Māori tourism experiences, build capability and business partnerships to meet the diverse needs of international and domestic markets.

Delivered, funded and facilitated events

53. The Tāmaki Herenga Waka Festival occurred on 31 January 2020 celebrating Auckland’s Māori heritage. The event was attended by nearly 6000 people and received media coverage. Overall customer satisfaction with the festival was 90 per cent.

54. To date, event cancellations and postponements due to COVID-19 have resulted in the loss of an estimated 74,179 visitor nights and over $10 million in GDP for the local economy. Cancelled events include the 2020 Auckland Lantern Festival, the 2020 Pasifika Festival and the 2020 Corona Piha Pro Challenger Series event.

55. Diwali and the second year of Elemental are confirmed to join other exciting events for the region in the coming months. Elemental 2020, like its inaugural festival last year, will take place all over the Auckland region. It will feature over 30 free and ticketed events in October. Elemental 2019 was attended by over 147,000 people. Due to uncertainty in the domestic tourism market, it is unlikely that there will be the same attendance for the 2020 festival.

56. Diwali is an annual festival that celebrates traditional and contemporary Indian culture in Aotea Square in the city centre and is set to occur in the last weekend of October this year. Last year’s festival was attended by approximately 65,000 people, up 9 per cent from an estimated 59,990 in 2018. Due to COVID-19, festival attendance is uncertain, but likely to decrease.

57. Figure 10 shows businesses ATEED works with across its major events. Major events stallholders are businesses that were supported through ATEED delivered events. Major Events Investments are those that were supported through ATEED sponsored events. Local boards not included in the graph were not part of such interventions.

Go With Tourism

58. Go with Tourism (GWT) is a jobs-matching platform that targets young people (18-30 years) and encourages them to consider a career in tourism. Since 2019, GWT has been expanded from an ATEED initiative to a national programme.

59. The platform signed up over 550 businesses prior to COVID-19, 149 of those were in Auckland.

60. In response to the pandemic, GWT formed a new ‘Support the Tourism Workforce’ Strategy which aims to help redeploy displaced tourism workers and provide guidance to businesses as they navigate their way through the impacts of the pandemic and, in due course, begin a post-crisis rebuild. Go with Tourism has received over 2200 requests for assistance from employees and businesses, since adopting the new strategy.

61. The industries most represented in the Auckland GWT programme (classified by Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification codes) are:

· Accommodation and Food Services (60 per cent)

· Arts and Recreation Services (19 per cent)

· Administrative and Support Services (7 per cent)

· Transport, Postal and Warehousing (5 per cent).

62. Because the programme is sector-focused, there is a cluster of businesses in tourism-heavy Waitematā Local Board (central city), and surrounding areas (Albert-Eden, Devonport-Takapuna, and Ōrākei local boards). Local boards not included in the graph did not have any businesses take part in the interventions.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

63. ATEED is currently considering how we respond to climate impacts in our projects and programmes. In the interim, ATEED assesses and responds to any impact that our initiatives may have on the climate on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

64. The proposed recommendation of receipt of this paper by the local board has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required in the preparation of this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

65. Local board views were not sought for the purposes of this report. However, such views were sought in the development of some of the initiatives as described in this paper.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

66. The proposed decision to receive the six-monthly report has no impact on Māori. ATEED assesses and responds to any impact that our initiatives may have on Māori on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

67. The recommendation to receive the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

68. The proposed decision to receive the six-monthly report has no risk. ATEED assesses and manages any risk associated with our initiatives on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

69. ATEED will provide the next six-monthly report to the local board in February 2021 which will cover the period 1 July to 31 December 2020.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Stephanie Sole, Strategy & Planning Graduate, ATEED

Authorisers

Quanita Khan, Manager Strategy and Planning, ATEED Lesley Jenkins - acting for Louise Mason, General Manager Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Papakura Local Board

28 October 2020

Local board views on plan change to enable rainwater tank installation for the Auckland region

File No.: CP2020/15435

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a plan change by Auckland Council to enable rainwater tank installation across urban and rural Auckland.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers on a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local boards’ views on the plan change, if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

3. Each local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board.^{^[8]}

4. Auckland Council’s plan change would change the Auckland Unitary Plan by adding a line entry in rural and urban zone activity tables, stating that a rainwater tank is a permitted activity. Additionally, a number of baseline standards designed to avoid objectionable outcomes would be developed for the installation of rainwater tanks along with assessment criteria where a resource consent was still required. Rainwater tanks would be excluded from the definition of “Building” in the Auckland Unitary Plan, and therefore would avoid many rules pertaining to buildings which have the potential to trigger the need for resource consent.

5. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on the council’s plan change. Staff do not provide recommendations on what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) provide local board views on council’s proposed change to the Auckland Unitary Plan to enable rainwater tank installation for the Auckland region

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on council’s enabling rainwater tanks plan change for the Auckland region

c) delegate authority to the chairperson of the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the private plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

6. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents.^{^[9]}

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

8. If appointed by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who decide on the plan change request.

9. This report provides an overview of the plan change.

10. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey. 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.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Plan change overview

11. The plan change applies to the Auckland region. The definition of “Building” in the Auckland Unitary Plan will be amended so that a rainwater tank will not be considered a building. A new definition will be introduced for “rainwater tank”. The activity tables of the following zones will have a new line entry stating that rainwater tanks are a permitted activity. The zones directly concerned are as follows:

§ Single House Zone

§ Large Lot Zone

§ Rural and Coastal Settlement Zone

§ Mixed Housing Suburban Zone

§ Mixed Housing Urban Zone

§ Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings Zone

§ Special Character Areas Overlay - Residential

§ Rural Production Zone

§ Mixed Rural Zone

§ Rural Coastal Zone

§ Rural Conservation Zone

§ Countryside Living Zone

§ Waitākere Foothills Zone

§ Waitākere Ranges Zone.

12. The purpose of the plan change is to enable rainwater tank installation across the Auckland region without the need for resource consent. Some baseline standards will be developed to avoid objectionable outcomes.

13. The notified plan change and section 32 document providing the rationale for the council plan change are available on the council’s website at:

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=83

14. Public submissions will be loaded onto the council’s website once the notification period has closed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

15. The council’s climate goals as set out in Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan include:

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and

· to prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change.

16. The need to initiate a plan change to enable rainwater tank installation is a response to Auckland’s current drought and potential water shortage in 2020/2021.

17. This uncertainty in water supply is likely to continue as our climate changes. Climate projections released by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research indicated that the Auckland region is likely to experience an increase of unpredictable rainfall and drought events in the Auckland region.

18. Removing unnecessary restrictions around the installation of rainwater tanks will support Auckland’s water security and resilience to climate change.

19. The proposed plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan supports Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan. One of the goals of the climate plan is to prepare Aucklanders to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

20. Easing barriers to the installation of rainwater tanks supports water supply management and aligns with the ‘Built Environment’ priority area in the Auckland Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. Other parts of the council group directly involved with the plan change include Healthy Waters, which has assisted with scoping the plan change, consultation and providing information for inclusion in the section 32 document (which provides the rationale for the plan change). Consultation has also occurred with Watercare and the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. This plan change affects all local boards.

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

· 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 board plan and the local board agreement

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

24. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori, well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview).

26. The council has initiated consultation with all iwi authorities in the Auckland region including the Independent Māori Statutory Board. Healthy Waters have engaged with iwi in the past on the matter of rainwater tanks and to date iwi have been very supportive of harvesting rainwater for household use.

27. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The plan change does not pose any financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. There is a risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on the plan change, if it doesn’t pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board to express its views and preferences

· the opportunity for a local board member to speak at a hearing.

30. If the local board chooses not to pass a resolution at this business meeting, these opportunities are forgone.

31. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s).^{^[10]} 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

32. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

33. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Barry Mosley - Principal Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

[2] Clevedon Road, Ron Keat Drive, Onslow Road and Railway Street West, excluding 18 – 22 Railway Street West.

[3] On Railway Street West including opposite the bus stop, on the walkway to the platform, at the entrance to the Auckland Transport park and ride carpark; and on Ron Keat Drive including on the overbridge and alongside the carparks.

[4] Some businesses were involved in an ATEED intervention for both Destination- and Economic Development-related activities, hence the numbers adding to over 3726. Business names must remain confidential for privacy reasons.

[5] Auckland Convention Bureau is responsible for positioning Auckland as a premium business events destination and for sales and marketing activity to grow the value and volume of business events in Auckland.

[6] This does not reflect all filming that takes place in studio, private property or low impact activity that does not require a permit.

[7] This includes local board fees only, other permit fees are directed to Auckland Transport (Special Events) and Regional Parks. Figures exclude GST and are as per the month the permit was invoiced, not necessarily when the activity took place.

[8] Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, section 15(2)(c).

[9] Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, ss15-16.

[10] Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, clause 36D.

Chairperson	Brent Catchpole
Deputy Chairperson	Jan Robinson
Members	Felicity Auva'a
	George Hawkins
	Keven Mealamu
	Sue Smurthwaite

No.	Report Title	Item no.	Meeting Date	Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board
1	Notice of Motion - Kylee Matthews - to support Biodiversity in the Hauraki Gulf – emailed to members 29 September 2020	21	23 September 2020	Waiheke Local Board
2	Upper Harbour Local Boards feedback on the Resource Recovery Network Strategy – emailed to members 19 October 2020	15	15 October 2020	Upper Harbour Local Board

Governance role	Examples
Setting direction / priorities / budget	Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan
Local initiatives / specific decisions	Grants, road names, alcohol bans
Input into regional decision-making	Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans
Oversight and monitoring	Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects
Accountability to the public	Annual report
Engagement	Community hui, submissions processes
Keeping informed	Briefings, cluster workshops

Author	Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager

Author	Beth Corlett - Advisor Plans & Programmes
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager