Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard

File No.: CP2020/16671

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal local board feedback on the Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard (the Standard) and proposed regional policy (Attachment A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Sustainable Asset Standard is a Community Facilities business improvement project consisting of three key deliverables to act on climate change in the built environment:

·      A policy to define minimum thresholds for Community Facilities assets to achieve sustainability or ‘green’ certifications. This policy is currently an internal staff guidance document, proposed to Governing Body to adopt formally as a regional policy and is provided as Attachment A.

·    Energy transition accelerator plans to align renewal works to reduce emissions at targeted, high-emissions sites.

·    The change management required to support staff and suppliers to deliver green certified assets meeting the standard set out by the policy.

3.       Sustainable asset certification tools are recognised as best practice to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts resulting from the development and operations of council assets, managed by Community Facilities.

4.       The Standard is coupled with a funding package through the Long-term Plan as part of Council’s response to climate change. Additional costs to certify those assets identified in the work programme are estimated at a 4.4 per cent premium calculated against existing budgets.

5.       The Governing Body’s adoption of the current internal policy as a regional policy would have two impacts on local board decision-making:

·    all growth projects over five million dollars and renewal projects over two million dollars would obtain green building certification at no less than a Green Star five-star rating (or equivalent certification), with net zero energy operations, and

·    as a fundamental principle of these rating tools, any design options provided to local boards for asset decision-making, would be required to provide whole-of-life considerations.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      support the Community Facilities Sustainable Asset Standard as an action of the Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri (Auckland’s Climate Plan) b)      provide any feedback to support the Governing Body’s consideration of the Standard as regional policy.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       In 2019 Auckland Council declared a climate emergency and in July 2020 the Environment and Climate Change Committee adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. The plan sets a 2030 target to reduce emissions by 50 per cent.

7.       Developing a Sustainable Asset Standard is an action under Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. This will enable Auckland Council to align asset management practices with the comprehensive frameworks of green building certification tools (e.g. Green Star, Living Building Challenge, Passive House, Infrastructure Sustainability).

8.       Buildings and open spaces managed by Community Facilities (CF) accounted for roughly 68 per cent of the council’s carbon footprint in 2019, as can be seen in Figure 1, right.

9.       As the source of such a large proportion of the council’s emissions, Community Facilities needs to urgently address climate change through the management of public assets.

10.     The Standard (orange in Figure 2, below) is one of eight key programmes identified in the Auckland Council Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction plan to reduce the organisation’s emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 (dashed line below).

 

 

11.     Adopting the Standard as part of this cycle of Long-term Plan funding positions the council to meet compliance changes to New Zealand’s building regulations expected in October 2021, from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment Building for Climate Change programme. If adopted, Auckland Council would be the first local government in the country to commit to using green building and sustainable infrastructure certifications.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12.     Staff explored two other options to provide a comprehensive asset-focussed response to climate change:

·     green building certification for existing assets (Green Star Performance)

·     organisational certification under (ISO 14001 Environmental Management System).

13.     The Green Star Performance ‘proof of case’ pilot certified the council’s three-building crematorium portfolio in 2018. It was the first in the country to receive a Green Star rating on operational assets.

14.     The pilot proved to be a valuable exercise in developing a performance improvement plan. It also proved that certification across the CF portfolio would be cost prohibitive, as the “Performance” rating required tri-annual, on-going recertification.

15.     Another option explored was a different type of certification, ISO 14001, which applies an environmental management system. Through investigation with the Chief Sustainability Office, Corporate Property and Corporate Health and Safety, it was determined that this certification is more suitable to a corporate application throughout the organisation, as opposed to only CF assets.

16.     This initial investigation also found that the certification did not address the cultural and social aspects to sustainable performance in a building or asset application. These comprehensive measures are essential in green building and sustainable infrastructure rating tools.

17.     Sixty-one per cent of C40 cities^[2] require green building certifications for all new facilities. For CF to manage its assets efficiently and sustainably, our practices need to go beyond building code compliance. Green building and infrastructure tools provide the framework to align CF asset management with international best practice to deliver better asset value and outcomes for Aucklanders.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     The Standard addresses climate mitigation by committing to carbon neutral growth and evidencing it using an independent assessment framework. The proposal’s primary benefit is to support Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri’s implementation. This will be acheived by mandating climate action in the built environment and making it transparent and accountable through Green Star (and other sustainable asset) certification processes.

19.     Climate adaptation is also supported through the use of these sustainable asset certification processes. These frameworks encourage sustainable design features to promote resilience to climate change’s extreme weather events. Features like rainwater harvesting, living roofs and walls, and potable water use avoidance through design, all support network-scale resilience to drought, floods, and heavy storms.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20.     The Standard aligns with the Auckland Council Group Green Building Framework, drafted in 2018 with input from Panuku Development Auckland, Auckland Transport, and the former Regional Facilities Auckland (RFA).

21.     Out of these Council Controlled Organisations, the Standard supports Panuku’s community-scale developments seeking Green Star Community certifications and the former RFA”s 2019 Green Building Standards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22.     If the Standard is adopted, the two main impacts on local boards are:

·    capital decisions on all growth projects over five million dollars, and renewal projects over two million dollars, would require green building certification at no less than a Green Star five-star rating (or equivalent certification). Growth projects will need to be net zero energy (energy use is generated on-site or through investment in renewable energy at other council facilities, any energy consumed from the grid is offset by exports to the grid)

·    as a fundamental principle of these rating tools, any design options provided to local boards for asset decision-making would be required to provide whole-of-life considerations, making climate impact statements and life cycle assessments more quantified for improved advice.

23.     Staff attended local board workshops in October and November 2020.  At the time of this report being drafted, informal feedback has been generally supportive, however, there is also a general concern that the costs to deliver certifications to this standard will exceed allocated budgets. This report seeks the formal views of local boards.

24.     The Standard directly addresses local board input as part to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri engagement in 2018, highlighting the need for council buildings to demonstrate best practice.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25.     The Standard supports Māori wellbeing by providing the operational tools required to action two key Māori outcomes strategies:

·     The Auckland Council Māori Outcomes Framework

·     Te Aranga Design Principles

26.     Community Facilities’ early commitment to green building and infrastructure tools, within the Aotearoa New Zealand context, also benefits Māori aspirations of visible and embedded Māori identity and culture in the building industry. Māori will have increasing influence over the tools’ applications and the definition of sustainable assets in the country.

27.     By becoming the first local government in the country to commit to green ratings, the council can leverage this leadership with applicable organisations to further emphasise the cultural significance of the frameworks.

28.     Input will be sought from mana whenua on this proposal at the next available kaitiaki forum (date yet to be confirmed).

Auckland Council Māori Outcomes Framework

29.     The Standard supports Ngā Whāinga Mahi three to 10 of the Auckland Council Māori Outcomes Framework:

3.0    Mārae Development

                   The Mārae development Programme’s primary objective is to provide healthy, safe and warm Mārae with longevity longevity for future generations, supported by the Standard’s indoor environmental quality metrics.

4.0     Te Reo Maori

Te reo Māori to be more visible, heard, and spoken in Tāmaki Makaurau.

5.0    Māori Identity and Culture

Embed Te Aranga Design Principles into staff procedures and templates and ensure consistent application for all CF capital design work.

6.0    Māori Business, Tourism and Employment

Enable staff to apply the Auckland Council Group Sustainable Procurement Framework consistently across all asset management procurement from capital works to full facility operational tenders.

7.0    Realising Rangatahi Potential

Rangatahi potential included via two pathways:

1.  by normalising sustainable procurement to deliver social outcomes (including those for youth) and

2.  by shifting asset decisions away from short-term project costs (which benefit current Aucklanders disproportionately over rangatahi), towards total-cost-of-life evaluation of assets, which support providing assets with lower operating costs and avoiding carbon emissions locked in by design.

8.0    Kaitiakitanga

Supports kaitiakitanga outcomes in two ways:

1.   by enabling built environment activities to improve environmental reporting and contribute to mātauranga Māori and

2.  by more effective Māori engagement to apply this mātauranga through social, equity, and innovation categories of certification frameworks.

9.0    Effective Māori Participation

Equity, social and innovation categories built into sustainable asset ratings incentivises increased engagement with Māori alongside Te Aranga Design Principles.

10.0  An Empowered Organisation

Climate change is affecting the cultural landscape in a way which makes natural resources less accessible to Māori in Tamaki Makaurau. The Standard approach acknowledges the relationship between te Tiriti and improving the sustainability of public assets to enable our workforce to deliver the Māori outcome of protecting natural taonga for future generations of Tamaki Makaurau.

Te Aranga Design Principles

30.     Measuring CF’s assets’ environmental performance supports the Te Aranga Design principle of Mauri Tu to protect, maintain and enhance the environment. Tools with a particular emphasis on place and the cultural relationships with land underscore the principles of Tohu and Ahi Kā, where cultural landmarks and heritage are designed into projects and enhance sense of place relationships.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31.     A four per cent^[3] cost increase is forecast for 30 capital projects to be certified under the Standard over the next ten years. This increase totals $14.5 million on top of the existing allocated budgets for these 30 projects. Funding will be sought through the Long-term Plan climate lane corporate emissions package, at a future Finance and Performance Committee meeting.

32.     The proposal makes provision for an additional $180,000 of asset-based service operational expense for tools development. This cost will be met by existing OpEx as part of the continuous improvement of CF business performance over the next three years, subject to change and approval as part of the LTP approval process and finalisation of the CapEx and OpEx budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     As the earliest adopter of green buildings and sustainable infrastructure at scale in Aotearoa, Auckland Council will face higher risks to implementation than those organisations which follow.

34.     Mitigation of these risks has been embedded in the delivery plan of the Standard by investing in change management to address industry maturity and staff capability.

35.     Major risks have been identified and addressed during the strategic assessment phase of the Standard’s project governance, including risks of inaction should the Standard not be implemented. Through this assessment, the reputational, financial, legal, and business risks were found to outweigh the risks of early adoption.

36.     Because the Standard is using project governance to deliver the change management, further risk management is iterative and will be further defined through the business case phase with the project team’s risk management plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37.     Formal local board feedback will be included in the proposal to the Governing Body when requesting the adoption of the Standard as regional policy.  The report will be put to the Governing Body in the first week of December 2020. For those business meetings occurring after the reporting deadline, this feedback will be made available to Governing Body separate to the report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a⇩	Community Facilities Sustainable Asset Policy	121

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Toto Vu-Duc - Manager Community Leases
Authorisers	Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities Manoj Ragupathy - Acting General Manager Local Board Services Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

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

File No.: CP2020/16965

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To update the Albert-Eden 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 Albert-Eden 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 21 commercial and residential interests in the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

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

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

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

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      receive the Panuku Auckland Development- Albert-Eden 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 50 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 Albert-Eden Local Board area:

Dominion Road/Valley Road

26.       On 9 March 2020, the Environment Court released an interim decision on the resource consent for the mixed-use development on this property. The court concluded that, excepting construction noise and vibration, the appeal could be granted subject to revised conditions. Panuku and council are now considering the decision and in particular, the court’s directions on the conditions for construction noise and vibration. Panuku plans to enter into discussions with neighbours on mitigation measures.

Properties managed in the Albert-Eden Local Board Area

27.     Panuku currently manages nine commercial and 12 residential properties within the Albert-Eden Local Board area.

Strategic Asset Optimisation

Service Property Optimisation

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

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

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

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

Portfolio review and rationalisation

Overview

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

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

Process

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

Acquisitions and disposals

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

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

Acquisitions

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

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

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

Disposals

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

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

42.     No properties have been sold in the Albert-Eden Local Board area during the reporting period.

Under review

43.     Properties currently under review in the Albert-Eden 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
520 Dominion Road (aka 173 Balmoral Road), Mt Eden	A small landlocked property, directly adjacent to Potters Park. It was acquired by the former Mount Eden Borough Council in 1940. The property is a local purpose (Plunket rooms) reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977. Council’s Community Facilities department is currently undertaking a building condition assessment of the property. The site is included in Schedule B of Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget asset recycling programme.
738 Mount Eden Road, Mount Eden	The site consists of two land parcels totalling 478m² located either side of a driveway that provides access to adjacent residential properties. It is not required for open space network purposes. 738 Mount Eden Road is a recreation reserve subject to Reserves Act 1977. The site is included in Schedule B of Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget asset recycling programme.
2 Wiremu Street, Balmoral	This site is a former residential property leased as a commercial childcare centre. No public work requirement has been identified for the property. Various options were investigated at the request of the local board, including retaining the property for community leasing purposes, but the proposed service uses are not supported by council departments.  In June 2016 council’s Finance and Performance Committee deferred making a decision to enable time for a possible location for a senior’s hub to be identified. Council’s Community Facilities department has reconfirmed advice previously provided that the property is not required for public works. The property is included in Schedule B of Auckland Council’s Emergency Budget asset recycling programme.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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

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

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

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

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

·     initiatives to build community resilience.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Perin Gerrand - Engagement Coordinator
Authorisers	David Rankin - Chief Executive (acting) Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

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

File No.: CP2020/15358

  

 

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 Albert-Eden 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
	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.

 

 

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.

 

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 Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

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

File No.: CP2020/15190

  

 

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 Albert-Eden 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 Albert-Eden 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 Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Local board views on Plan Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct

File No.: CP2020/16357

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To invite the Albert-Eden Local Board to provide its views on Plan Change 53 – Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct, a council-initiated plan change.

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, including plan changes. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board.^[11]

4.       Auckland Council notified proposed Plan Change 53 – Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct on 24 September 2020. Submissions closed on 20 October 2020. The plan change proposes to change the Auckland Unitary Plan by enabling an increase in the number of temporary activities able to be undertaken as permitted activities in the following manner.

a)    Requiring a traffic management plan (as a permitted activity standard) for an event in a rural or Future Urban zone where more than 500 vehicle movements per day on adjacent roads are generated.

b)    Increasing the duration of those temporary activities that are defined as noise events (i.e. they exceed the noise standards for the zone) from six to eight hours.

c)    Aligning Anzac Day in the Pukekohe Park precinct to the definition under the Anzac Day Act 1966.

5.       Two additional minor changes are proposed to address anomalies - a gap in the coastal temporary activities and a minor wording change to the temporary activities Activity Table.

6.       The Auckland Unitary Plan objectives and policies seek to enable temporary activities so that they can contribute to a vibrant city and enhance the well-being of communities. At the same time, it seeks to mitigate adverse effects on amenity values, communities, the natural environment, historic heritage and sites and places of significance to mana whenua. The proposed plan change does not alter these objectives and policies.

7.       The critical themes from submissions are:

·   removing the lighting of fireworks as a permitted activity from Pukekohe Park precinct

·   treating Sundays the same as other days of the week when Anzac Day falls on a Sunday at Pukekohe Park (i.e. an event can occur from 1pm onwards)

·   adding the New Zealand Transport Authority to the authorisers of the Transport and Traffic Management Plan (alongside Auckland Transport) where there is potential impact on the state highway network

·   support for the plan change in respect of temporary military training activities.

8.       No iwi authority has made a submission in support or opposition to the plan change.

9.       This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on Plan Change 53 should it wish to do so. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      provide local board views on Plan Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park precinct. b)      appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on Plan Change 53. c)      delegate authority to the chairperson of the Albert-Eden Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the plan change hearing.

 

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority  

10.     Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of 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.^[12]

11.     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.

12.     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.

13.     This report provides an overview of the proposed plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), and a summary of submissions’ key themes.

14.     The report does not recommend what the local board should convey, if the local board conveys its views on plan change 53. 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

15.     The temporary activities plan change applies to the Auckland region and one specific change applies to the Pukekohe Park precinct.

16.     The purpose of proposed Plan Change 53 – Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct is to:

·   reduce some of the compliance costs associated with temporary activities. This is in respect of the duration of noise events, the requirement for a resource consent to address traffic management issues for events in rural areas and the interpretation of Anzac Day in relation to the Pukekohe Park precinct

·   address two discrepancies in the temporary activity standards – one in the Activity Table (E40.4.1) and a gap in the coastal temporary activity provisions (E25.6.14).

17.     The Section 32 Report and details of the plan change are available from the council’s website at PlanChange53. The council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

·   the Section 32 Report that accompanies the plan change

·   submissions

·   the views and preferences of the local board, if the local board passes a resolution.

Themes from submissions received

18.     Key submission themes are listed below.

·   Removing the lighting of fireworks as a permitted activity from Pukekohe Park.

·   Treating Sundays the same as other days of the week when Anzac Day falls on a Sunday at Pukekohe Park (i.e. an event can occur from 1pm onwards).

·   Adding NZTA (New Zealand Transport Authority) to the authorisers of the Transport and Traffic Management Plan (alongside Auckland Transport) where there is potential impact on the state highway network, and

·   Support for the plan change in respect of temporary military training activities.

19.     Submissions were made by four people/organisations:

Table 1: Submissions received on plan change 53

Submissions	Number of submissions
In support	1
In support but requesting change(s)	3
In opposition	0
Neutral	0
Total	4

 

20.     Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from the council’s website: PlanChange53.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21.     There were no submissions that raised specific climate concerns.

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

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

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

23.     The local board could consider if the plan change:

·   will reduce, increase or have no effect on Auckland’s overall greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. does it encourage car dependency, enhance connections to public transit, walking and cycling or support quality compact urban form)

·   prepares the region for the adverse impacts of climate change; that is, does the proposed plan change elevate or alleviate climate risks (e.g. flooding, coastal and storm inundation, urban heat effect, stress on infrastructure).

24.     The propose changes to the temporary activity standards and the Pukekohe Park precinct are neutral in terms of climate change impacts.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     Auckland Transport and ATEED will review relevant submissions and provide expert input to the hearing report.

26.     ATEED made a submission and the key matter raised is the need to treat Sundays the same as other days of the week when Anzac Day falls on a Sunday at Pukekohe Park (i.e. an event can occur from 1pm onwards).

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

Local impacts and local board views

27.     The plan change affects Auckland-wide provisions and will therefore affect all local boards.

28.     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 or the local board agreement

·   responsibilities and operation of the local board.

29.     On 17 July 2020, a memo was sent to all local boards outlining the proposed changes, the rationale for them and the likely plan change timeframes.^[13]

30.     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

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

32.     Plans and Places consulted with all iwi authorities when it prepared the plan change. On 14 July 2020, a memorandum outlining the draft proposed plan change was sent to all Auckland’s 19 mana whenua entities as required under the Resource Management Act. Consultation has also been undertaken with the Independent Māori Statutory Board. Responses were received from Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and Ngai Tai ki Tamaki.

33.     Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei had no concerns with the proposed changes and did not need to engage further. Ngai Tai ki Tamaki advised that a potential concern is the Marine and Coastal Area Act – Takutai Moana claims and legal processes.  The proposed changes however do not impact on the activities able to be undertaken in the coastal marine area. They address a gap in the noise standards for the coastal marine area.

34.     No iwi authorities made a formal submission.

35.     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.^[14] The plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017.^[15]

 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.     The proposed plan change involves changes to some of the standards for temporary activities and the Pukekohe Park precinct in the AUP. This will make it easier and less expensive for event organisers from a resource management perspective – i.e. they may not need a resource consent.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37.     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 Albert-Eden Local Board to express its views and preferences if it so wishes; and

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

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40.     The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the Section 42A 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.

41.     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	Tony Reidy - Senior Policy Planner
Authorisers	John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Local board delegations to allow local views to be provided on matters relating to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and the Urban Development Act

File No.: CP2020/16361

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To recommend that the Albert-Eden Local Board appoints a local board member to:

·   provide formal local board feedback on applications proposed and being processed under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

·   represent the local board at the Planning Committee Political Working Party on the Urban Development Act, as required.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The government has recently enacted two new pieces of legislation: the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and the Urban Development Act 2020.

3.       The COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 provides an alternative resource consenting process to the usual process under the Resource Management Act 1991. This process is designed to ‘fast-track’ resource consent processes to enable development and infrastructure projects to commence more quickly, to help support the economic recovery and create jobs. Resource consent applications will be lodged directly with central government’s Environmental Protection Authority.

4.       The Urban Development Act 2020 gives Kāinga Ora access to a series of development powers and the ability to establish specified development projects. Most of these powers can only be used within a specified development project but some are also available for use in ‘business as usual’ developments that Kāinga Ora undertakes. Each of the powers has been designed to address a specific barrier to development.

5.       The Planning Committee has delegated to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee, in consultation with the Mayor’s Office, the power to establish a Political Working Group to provide political direction on the execution of powers and functions under the Urban Development Act 2020. Each political working group established will comprise of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee, a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board, relevant ward councillor(s) and a representative of relevant local board(s).

6.       The council can provide feedback on applications processed under both the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and the Urban Development Act 2020; however, the timeframes are very short. To ensure that local boards can provide feedback, it is proposed that each local board appoint one local board member to provide formal local board views (feedback) on applications proposed and being processed under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and to represent the local board on any relevant Political Working Party established to give political direction on the execution of the council’s powers under the Urban Development Act 2020.

 

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      delegate to a member, with an alternate, the authority to provide the local board views in respect of matters under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020, noting that given the timeframes under the Act, it is not practicable for the matters to come before the full local board b)      appoint a member, with an alternate, as the Albert-Eden Local Board representative as required, on any Political Working Group established (in accordance with the Planning Committee’s resolution PLA/2020/79 on 1 October 2020), to give political direction on the execution of the council’s powers under the Urban Development Act 2020.

 

Horopaki

Context

COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

7.       In May 2020, the Government enacted the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 to fast-track the consenting of eligible development and infrastructure projects as a major element of its COVID-19 rebuild plan. This legislation commenced in July 2020, and will be repealed in July 2022.

8.       The COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 provides an alternative to the usual resource consenting process under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). This process is designed to ‘fast-track’ resource consenting processes to enable development and infrastructure projects to commence more quickly, help support the economic recovery and create jobs.

9.       Some infrastructure and development projects are listed in the COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020. In Auckland, the six listed projects are:

·   Unitec Residential Development

·   Papakainga development in Point Chevalier

·   Britomart Station Eastern End Upgrade

·   Papakura to Pukekohe Rail Electrification

·   Northern Pathway – Westhaven to Akoranga shared pathway

·   Papakura to Drury South State Highway 1 Improvements.  

10.     Resource consent applications for these listed projects are lodged directly with central government’s Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). An expert panel is formed for each application, to assess it and decide whether to approve or decline it.

11.     Additionally, an applicant can request the Minister for the Environment to refer an application to an expert panel, utilising the fast-track process. The COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 specifies a range of considerations for the Minister, including:

·   the public good aspects of the application

·   its potential contribution to job creation and economic activity

·   the potential significance of any environmental effects

·   whether the consenting process under the COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 is likely to be significantly faster than a usual RMA resource consent process.

12.     The expert panel must include one member who is nominated by Auckland Council. This will be considered on a case by case basis, with the nominated member potentially being a councillor, local board member, or council staff member. Decisions on the nomination of the panel member will be made by the General Manager Resource Consents, or the General Manager Plans and Places where a Notice of Requirement (designation) is involved. Discussion, including with the relevant local board(s), will inform this decision.

13.     There are two opportunities for local boards to provide feedback in relation to resource consents following the fast-track process. In both cases, the council has 10 working days to provide feedback.

·   The first opportunity is where the Minister for the Environment must consult with Auckland Council when there are new applications proposed for the fast-track process.

·   The second opportunity occurs when the panel invites comment on the application.

14.     Staff will seek formal feedback from the local board, and the local board will have four working days to provide this feedback to the council’s project lead. The feedback will be included as part of Auckland Council’s comment.

Urban Development Act 2020

15.     The Urban Development Act 2020 commenced on 7 August 2020. The Urban Development Act 2020 provides for functions, powers, rights and duties of the Crown entity Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities, to enable it to undertake its urban development functions.

16.     This Act gives Kāinga Ora access to a series of development powers and the ability to establish specified development projects (attachment A). Most of these powers can only be used within a specified development project but some are also available for use in ‘business as usual’ developments that Kāinga Ora undertakes. Each of the powers has been designed to address a specific barrier to development. Not all powers will be needed by every project.

17.     This Act confers powers and functions on Auckland Council such as indicating support for the establishment of a specified development area and nominating a representative to sit on an independent hearings panel for a specified development project. The timeframes for carrying out these powers and functions is tight, only 20 working days in some instances.

18.     At its 1 October 2020 meeting, the Planning Committee (PLA/2020/79) delegated to the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee, in consultation with the Mayor’s Office, the power to establish a Political Working Group to provide political direction on the execution of powers and functions where staff advise that one or more of the following criterial are met.

·   The development plan is inconsistent with the Auckland Unitary Plan and/or not aligned with the outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050.

·   The specified development area is out of sequence with the Auckland Plan Development Strategy and Future Urban Land Supply Strategy.

·   There is insufficient infrastructure to support the development plan and/or significant public infrastructure spend is required to support the project.

·   There are significant implications for the Parks Network Plans for the same location.

·   There is a significant impact on Auckland Council/Council-Controlled Organisation (CCO) and/or third-party infrastructure.

·   There is the potential for significant adverse environmental effects to occur.

19.     Each political working party will comprise of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee, a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board, relevant ward councillor(s) and a representative of relevant local board(s).

20.     Attachment B sets out the steps involved in setting up a specified development project. At the time of writing this local board report, no specified development project areas have been proposed within Auckland. Local boards will have the opportunity to provide feedback on proposals administered under the Urban Development Act 2020, but it is likely that any opportunities will have short timeframes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 – options considered

21.     Local boards normally provide their formal views at business meetings (option two in Table 1), however, the timeframes under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 make this mostly impossible to achieve. As local boards will only have four working days to provide their views, it is recommended that a delegation is provided to one local board member and one alternate (option three in Table 1).

22.     At the start of the electoral term, local boards selected delegates to provide local board views on resource consent notification and local board views on notified resource consents. They may wish to delegate these responsibilities to the same local board delegates and alternates.

Table 1: Options for local boards to provide their formal views on applications proposed and administered under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

Options	Pros	Cons
1.   No formal local board views are provided.		·      Local board views will not be considered on applications made under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020.
2.   Formal local board views are provided at a business meeting.	·      All local board members contribute to the local board view. ·      Provides transparent decision making.	·      Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines are unlikely to align with statutory deadlines imposed by the planning process.
3.   Formal local board views are provided by way of delegation to one local board member for all applications (preferred option).	·      Nominated local board member is able to develop expertise on the subject on behalf of the local board. ·      Local boards can provide their views in a timely way that meets statutory deadlines. ·      Nominated local board member may informally obtain and consider the views of other local board members. ·      Any feedback can be reported back to the local board.	·      Decisions are not made by the full local board. ·      Decisions made under delegation are not made at a public meeting (decisions are made public once submitted via the planning process).

 

Urban Development Act 2020

23.     Due to the tight timeframes provided for under the Urban Development Act 2020, the Planning Committee authorised a delegation to promptly establish a Political Working Group for proposed specified development projects. Because establishment of each group will likely be required at pace, it is unlikely that local boards will have time to select a representative at a business meeting. It is therefore recommended, that the local board appoints one local board member (and an alternate) to sit as the local board representative on any relevant political working group convened to consider the council’s position on Urban Development Act 2020 matters.

24.     At the start of the electoral term local boards selected delegates to provide local board views on resource consent notification and local board views on notified resource consents. They may wish to delegate these responsibilities to the same local board delegates and alternates.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25.     The matters raised in this report do not have any impact on climate change as they address procedural matters.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     This report recommends the delegation to and appointment of local board members to ensure that the council can undertake its operational and statutory duties in a timely manner, while receiving local board input on matters that are of local importance.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27.     This report seeks to appoint nominated board members to perform particular functions.

28.     Any local board member who is appointed as a nominated board member should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29.     A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have a positive or negative impact for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     If local boards choose not to delegate authority/appoint a representative to provide views on matters relating to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and the Urban Development Act 2020, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views within statutory timeframes and will miss the opportunity to have their feedback considered.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Training for local board members will be offered on the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 and the Urban Development Act 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a⇩	Summary of Powers available to Kāinga Ora	165
b⇩	The Specified Development Project process	167

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor
Authorisers	Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Addition to the 2019-2022 Albert-Eden Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2020/16670

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval for additional meeting dates to be added to the 2019-2022 Albert-Eden Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 time frames.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Albert-Eden Local Board adopted the 2019-2022 meeting schedule on Wednesday, 4 December 2019.

3.       At that time the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 were unknown.

4.       The local board is being asked to approve the following two meeting dates as an addition to the Albert-Eden Local Board meeting schedule so that the modified 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 timeframes can be met and noting the local board does not yet have a business meeting scheduled in December 2020 due to the Christmas period:

·    2.00pm, Tuesday, 1 December 2020, to be held at the Albert-Eden Local Board Office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt Eden.

·    2.00pm, Tuesday, 4 May 2021, to be held at the Albert-Eden Local Board Office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt Eden.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      approve the addition of the following meeting dates to be added to the 2019-2022 Albert-Eden Local Board meeting schedule, to accommodate the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 timeframes: i.          2.00pm, 2.00pm, Tuesday, 1 December 2020, to be held at the Albert-Eden Local Board Office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt Eden; ii.          2.00pm, Tuesday, 4 May 2021, to be held at the Albert-Eden Local Board Office, 135 Dominion Road, Mt Eden.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules

6.       In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

·    clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings, which requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings.  Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

·    sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA, which requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

7.       The Albert-Eden Local Board adopted its 2019-2022 business meeting schedule at its Wednesday, 4 December 2019 business meeting.

8.       The timeframes for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement which is part of the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9.       The local board is being asked to make decisions in early-December 2020, early-May 2021 and mid-June 2021 to feed into the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 process. The early-December 2020 and early-May 2021 timeframes are outside the local board’s normal meeting cycle. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The local board has two choices:

i)        add the meetings as additions to the meeting schedule.

or

ii)       add the meetings as extraordinary meetings

11.     For option one, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting.  However, there is a risk that if the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 timeframes change again or the information is not ready for the meeting there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled anyway.

12.     For option two, only the specific topic 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 process could be considered at this meeting.

13.     Since there is enough time to meet statutory requirements, staff recommend option one, approving this meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule, as it allows more flexibility for the local board to consider a range of issues. This requires a decision of the local board.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14.     This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision’s implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15.     There is no specific impact for the council group from this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16.     This report requests the local board’s decision to schedule additional meetings and consider whether to approve them as extraordinary meetings or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17.     There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18.     There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19.     If the local board decides not to add these business meetings to its schedule this will cause a delay to the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 process, which would result in the input of the local board not being able to be presented to the Governing Body for their consideration and inclusion in the Budget.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

20.     Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Beth Corlett - Advisor Plans & Programmes
Authorisers	Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Governing Body Members' Update

File No.: CP2020/00702

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the local ward area Governing Body Members to update the local board on Governing Body issues they have been involved with since the previous local board meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Standing Orders 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 provides provision in the local board meeting for Governing Body Members to update their local board counterparts on regional matters of interest to the local board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      receive Governing Body Members Christine Fletcher and Cathy Casey’s verbal updates

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2020/00713

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the local board chairperson to provide a written update on projects, meetings and other initiatives relevant to the local board’s interests.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 2.4.7, the chairperson will update board members by way of a written report.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      receive the Chairperson’s report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Board Member's Reports

File No.: CP2020/00723

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for local board members to provide a written update on projects and events-attended since the previous month’s meeting and to discuss other matters of interest to the board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This is an information item and it is optional for board members to provide a written board member report for inclusion in the agenda.

3.       Local board members are recommended to use a Notice of Motion, rather than a Board Member Report, should a member wish to propose a recommendation or request action to be undertaken by staff.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      receive the written Board Member Reports for November 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Governance Forward Work Calendar

File No.: CP2020/00735

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Albert-Eden Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar, which is a schedule of items that are expected to be reported to the local board during business meetings and/or workshops over the next 12 months.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report contains the governance forward work calendar, a schedule of items that will come before the Albert-Eden Local Board during business meetings and/or workshops over the next 12 months. The local board’s governance forward work calendar is appended to this report under Attachment A.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

·     ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

·     clarifying what advice is required and when

·     clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be reported to the local board’s monthly business meetings and distributed to relevant council staff.  At times there may be items that will arise that are not programmed or noted in the governance calendar.  Local board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      note the November 2020 edition of the Albert-Eden Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - November 2020	181

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Records

File No.: CP2020/00747

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the local board to receive the records of its recent workshops held following the previous local board business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance to Standing Order 12.1.4, the local board shall receive a record of the general proceedings of each of its local board workshops held over the past month.

 

Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Albert-Eden Local Board: a)      receive the Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Records for the workshops held on 13 and 27 October and 3 and 10 November 2020.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a⇩	13 October 2020 - Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record	187
b⇩	27 October 2020 - Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record	191
c⇩	3 November 2020 - Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record	195
d⇩	10 November 2020 - Albert-Eden Local Board Workshop Record	199

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

 

    

  

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 8.1      Attachment a    Presentation re. Repair Cafe New Zealand  Page 205

Albert-Eden Local Board 17 November 2020