I hereby give notice that an ordinary
meeting of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Thursday, 19
November 2020
2:00pm
Council
Chamber,
50 Centreway Road,
Orewa
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Gary Brown
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Victoria Short
|
|
|
Members
|
Andy Dunn
|
|
|
|
Janet Fitzgerald, JP
|
|
|
|
Gary Holmes
|
|
|
|
Julia Parfitt, JP
|
|
|
|
Alexis Poppelbaum
|
|
|
|
Leanne Willis
|
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
|
Gemma Kaldesic
Democracy Advisor
16 November 2020
Contact Telephone: 02 152 7397
Email: gemma.kaldesic@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of
Interest 5
4 Confirmation
of Minutes 5
5 Leave
of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 5
8.1 Deputation: Lisa White and Belinda
Greenwood - Whangaparaoa Hub Trust (Family Services/community hub trust) 5
9 Public
Forum 6
9.1 Public Forum - Lorraine Sampson - Silverdale
Matters 6
10 Extraordinary Business 6
11 Auckland Transport
November 2020 Update Report 9
12 Auckland Transport -
Silverdale Advanced Directional Signage 17
13 Auckland Transport –
Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report November 2020 21
14 Local board views on plan
change to enable rainwater tank installation for the Auckland region 27
15 Draft Hibiscus and Bays
Local Parks Management Plan – establishing the hearings panel 33
16 Hibiscus and Bays Local
Parks Management Plan - approving Reserves Act classifications following public
notification 41
17 New Community Lease to The
Scount Association of NZ - Whangaparaoa Stanmore Bay 57
18 Community
Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard 65
19 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 73
20 Local board views on Plan
Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct 83
21 Approval for Private Road
Names for Subdivision at 207 - 249A & 257 Vaughans Road & 6 - 12
Piripiri Point Drive, Okura 89
22 Panuku Development
Auckland- Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Six-Monthly Report 01 March to 31
August 2020. 99
23 Addition to the 2019-2020
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board meeting schedule 107
24 Governance forward work
calendar 111
25 Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board workshop records 115
26 Members' Reports 119
27 Deputations update 127
28 Consideration
of Extraordinary Items
2 Apologies
At the close of
the agenda no apologies had been received.
3 Declaration
of Interest
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from
decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any
private or other external interest they might have.
4 Confirmation
of Minutes
|
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a)
confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting
held on Thursday 5 November 2020 as a true and
correct record.
|
5 Leave
of Absence
At the close of
the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
6 Acknowledgements
At the close of
the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
7 Petitions
At the close of
the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
8 Deputations
Standing
Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required
to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are
approved by the Chairperson of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board. This means
that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda.
Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the
meeting.
|
8.1 Deputation:
Lisa White and Belinda Greenwood - Whangaparaoa Hub Trust (Family
Services/community hub trust)
|
|
|
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) thank
Lisa White and Belinda Greenwood for their deputation.
|
|
Attachments
a 19 November 2020 - Hibiscus and Bays Local Board,
Deputation: Whangaparaoa Hub Trust............................................................................ 133
|
9 Public
Forum
A period of
time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to
address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3
minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.
|
9.1 Public
Forum - Lorraine Sampson - Silverdale Matters
|
|
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose
of the report
1. To
deliver a presentation to the local board during the public forum segment of
the business meeting.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive
summary
2. Lorraine
Sampson will be in attendance to present to the local board on Silverdale
matters.
|
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive
the presentation and thank Lorraine Sampson for her attendance.
|
|
Attachments
a 19 November 2020 - Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board, Public Forum: Lorraine Sampson........................................................................................ 145
|
10 Extraordinary
Business
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt
with at that meeting if-
(a) The
local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The
presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the
public,-
(i) The reason why
the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The
reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent
meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item
may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That
item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority;
and
(ii) the
presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is
open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no
resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item
except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for
further discussion.”
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Auckland
Transport November 2020 Update Report
File No.: CP2020/17127
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
provide an update on Auckland Transport activities in the Hibiscus
and Bays Local Board area.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This
report covers:
· responses
to Local Board resolutions
· a
summary of Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area
· a
summary of the local board’s Transport Capital and Community Safety Funds
· a
summary of the consultations and general information items sent to the local
board.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive
the Auckland Transport update November 2020.
|
Horopaki
Context
3. Auckland
Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services,
excluding state highways. We report on a monthly basis to local boards, as set
out in our Local Board Engagement Plan. This monthly reporting commitment
acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play in the governance
of Auckland on behalf of their local communities.
4. This
report updates the local board on Auckland Transport projects and operations in
the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area, it summarises consultations and Traffic
Control Committee decisions, and includes information on the status of the
Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund (CSF).
5. The
LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by the Governing Body and
delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver
transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not
part of Auckland Transport’s work programme.
6. The
CSF is a capital budget established by Auckland Transport for use by local
boards to fund local road safety initiatives. The purpose of this fund is to
allow elected members to address long-standing local road safety issues that
are not regional priorities and are therefore not being addressed by the Auckland
Transport programme.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Response to resolutions
7. In response to resolution number HB/2020/100
that the local board:
“request
Auckland Transport attend a workshop with the local board around the future
transport purposes for the intersection at Brightside and Whangaparaoa
roads”
8. As
requested, a workshop was held with the board on the 22nd of October
2020.
9. “request Auckland Transport extend its
submission period for public feedback on the Ramsgate Terrace Bus Lane proposal
until after a time that its planned community drop-in consultation session is
able to take place.”
10. Note that the consultation period has been extended and
that the drop-session has been rescheduled to take place on the 9th
November 2020.
Auckland
Transport projects and operations in the local board area
11. The table
below has a general summary of projects and activities of interest to the local
board with their current status. Please note that all timings are indicative
and are subject to change:
|
Item
|
Update
|
|
301 Beach
Road, Campbells Bay - Pedestrian Improvements
|
Project is in
detailed design.
|
|
522 Beach
Road, Murrays Bay - Broken Yellow Lines
|
These
works are being planned for delivery in November 2020.
|
|
Anzac Road, Browns Bay – Pedestrian Improvements
|
Project is in
detailed design. Following feedback from the local board the team will ensure
that this is built in conjunction with the pavement rehab work.
|
|
Beach Road
and Bute Road, Browns Bay – Roundabout upgrade
|
Project is
currently in detailed design stage.
Progress on
this project is on hold until available budgets are confirmed.
|
|
Glenvar Road
and East Coast Road project - footpath and intersection upgrades, transition
lanes, cycle facility upgrades, and safety measures.
|
The Single
Stage Business Case is mostly completed and is scheduled to go to AT’s
Board in December.
$500,000 from
the ‘Pipeline’ fund has been set aside to start detailed design
in 2021, if the Business Case is approved.
Funding for the
project will need to be confirmed in the 2021-2031 Regional Land Transport
Plan in June 2021.
Staff will
present the findings of the Single Stage Business Case in the December
including responses to public and stakeholder feedback.
|
|
Item
|
Update
|
|
Hibiscus
Coast bus station
|
The project
Covid-19 related delays have been minimised and the construction programme is
remaining on-track for January 2021 completion.
Current works
are the waiting halls and walkway enclosing which will continue through to
November. Building fitout and retail installation will then progress through
to January.
The additional
90-space carpark will become operational when the station building is opened.
The above
completion dates are subject to any further Covid-19 alert level changes.
|
|
Hibiscus
Coast Highway – Footpath Project between Noel Avenue and Puriri Avenue
|
External
consultation completed and currently in close-out phase.
Progress on
this project is on hold until available budgets are confirmed.
|
|
Hibiscus
Coast Highway – Footpath Project between Silverdale Street and
Millwater Parkway/Hibiscus Coast Highway Intersection
|
The two
separate projects (Batch B and Batch C) are being re-designed together by the
consultant.
Progress on
this project is on hold until available budgets are confirmed for 2020/21.
|
|
Long Street,
Torbay – Broken Yellow Lines
|
Scheduled for
delivery in January 2021.
|
|
Orewa Town
Centre Safety Improvements
|
Construction is
underway.
|
|
Ramsgate
Terrace – Proposed bus lanes and pedestrian improvements
|
Public
consultation is underway. Following feedback from the Local Board the project
team have rescheduled the public drop in session to the 9th
November 2020.
|
|
Whangaparaoa
Road, Tower Hill and Main Street – Intersection Improvements
|
In detailed
design.
|
Local Board Transport Capital Fund
12. Auckland
Transport has updated the local board on the effect of the Auckland Council
Emergency Budget allocation to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)
and the budget now available in 2020/2021.
13. The
new allocation for the financial year 2020/2021 for the Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board is $305,105.
14. There
is a separate decision report relating to the LBTCF attached to the agenda of
this meeting.
Community Safety Fund Projects Update
15. The
Community Safety Fund is funded from AT’s safety budget and is dependent
on the level of funding AT receives from Auckland Council. This level of
funding has been constrained through the Emergency Budget process.
16. Safety
projects will be prioritised according to DSI (death and serious injury) data
and therefore local board community safety projects will continue with planning
and design but will not be delivered in the 2020/2021 financial year.
17. The
below table has an update on the projects in the Community Safety Fund:
|
Name
|
Project Description
|
Update
|
|
20 Ramsgate
Terrace, Mairangi Bay
|
Upgrade
existing speed table to a raised zebra crossing. Crossing may need to be
relocated depending on results of a pedestrian survey.
|
Following
internal AT consultation it was decided to redesign the speed table type from
a Swedish to a standard 6m bus friendly table with kerb build outs.
Design has been
reconsulted internally.
Next steps will
be to discuss the project with the board before we consult externally.
|
|
214 Hibiscus
Coast Highway, Orewa –
|
Signalised
crossing for both cyclists and pedestrians linking shared paths across
Hibiscus Coast Highway
|
Project is in
detailed design.
|
|
544 Hibiscus
Coast Highway, Hatfield's Beach.
|
New gateway
treatment on Hibiscus Coast Highway on either approach to Hatfields Beach.
Also, installing a new pedestrian refuge with side islands.
|
Project is in
detailed design.
|
|
Saddleback
Rise pedestrian crossing
|
Upgrade
existing speed table to a raised zebra crossing.
|
Consultation is
complete and the project is on hold until budget becomes available.
|
Traffic
Control Committee Decisions
18. AT's
resolution and approval process ensures the most appropriate controls and
restrictions are put in place and can be legally enforced. The decisions made
by AT’s Traffic Control Committee in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
during September 2020 is as follows:
Street Name
|
Report Type
|
Nature of Restriction
|
Decision
|
|
Kenneth
Hopper Place / Polkinghorne Drive
|
Permanent
Traffic and Parking changes
|
No Stopping At
All Times
|
Approved with
Conditions
|
|
Centreway
Road / Florence Avenue / Alice Avenue / Hibiscus Coast Highway / Marine View
/ George Lowe Place / Tenzing Lane / Moana Avenue / Bakehouse Lane / Keith
Morris Lane / Tamariki Avenue / Cammish Lane / Moenui Avenue
|
Permanent
Traffic and Parking changes
|
No Stopping At
All Times / Give-Way Control / Stop Control / Pedestrian Crossing / Road Hump
/ Edge Line / Bus Stop / Shoulder Marking / Angle Parking / Flush Median /
Traffic Island / Loading Zone / Footpath / Roundabout / Road Markings For
Speed Management / Cycle Lane / Lanes / Lane Arrow Marking
|
Noted
|
|
Beach Road
|
Permanent
Traffic and Parking changes
|
No Stopping At
All Times / Bus Stop / Bus Shelter / Flush Median / Edge Line
|
Carried
|
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
19. Auckland
Transport engages closely with council on developing strategy, actions and
measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland
Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.
20. Auckland
Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private
vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the
extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
21. The impact of information (or decisions) in this report is confined
to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the council group.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
22. Auckland
Transport regularly corresponds with the local board on matters of interest in
their area. This is for the local boards information and to provide an
opportunity for the local board to provide feedback.
23. A workshop
was held with the Board on the 22 September 2020 to discuss the Brightside and Whangaparaoa road intersection.
Information
items sent to the board:
24. Please see
below for a summary of items sent to the local board for their information or
feedback:
|
Item
|
Date sent to Board
|
|
FYI: 1 Anzac
Rd Browns Bay
|
7/10/20
|
|
Update:
Orewa Speed Management programme
|
8/10/20
|
|
FYI: AT
Metro Consultation - Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
|
14/10/20
|
|
FYI:
Ramsgate Terrace Drop In
|
15/10/20
|
|
Proposal
outcome: Whangaparaoa Road, Tower Hill and Main Street, Stanmore Bay -
Intersection Improvements
|
16/10/20
|
|
Proposal
outcome: Calypso Place, Rothesay Bay - Broken Yellow Lines
|
16/10/20
|
|
FYI:
Wrapping for Exeloo installed at HIbiscus Coast bus station
|
22/10/20
|
|
FYI: Public
feedback on Orewa Boulevard Stage 3
|
4/11/20
|
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
25. The
proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for
Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and
opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
26. There
are no financial implications in receiving this report.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
27. In response
to Auckland Council’s emergency budget Auckland Transport’s capital
and operating budgets have been reduced. Some projects we had planned for
2020/2021 may not be able to be delivered and we expect this will be
disappointing to communities that we had already engaged with.
28. Both the CSF
and the LBTCF are impacted by these budget reductions.
29. Auckland
Transport will mitigate this risk by clearly communicating with the Board on
the outcomes and new funding levels so that the Board may make the best use of
their available funds.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
30. Auckland
Transport will provide another update report to the local board next month.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Ben Halliwell - Elected Member
Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
|
|
Authorisers
|
Jonathan Anyon – Elected Member
Relationship Unit Manager, Auckland Transport
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Auckland Transport - Silverdale Advanced
Directional Signage
File No.: CP2020/17128
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek a determination from the Local Board on the appropriate nomenclature
to be used on the Advanced Direction signage, particularly as it relates to
ongoing vandalism issues of the signage at the intersection of Silverdale
Street and Hibiscus Coast Highway.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Silverdale
commercial area has seen growth in recent years with the establishment of a new
town centre area which is connected to the long-established retail area on
Silverdale Street.
3. In
2018 a request was received from the Silverdale Business Association (SABA) to
provide updated advanced directional signage (ADS) from Hibiscus Coast Highway
through Silverdale Street to the Silverdale centre. Auckland Transport
installed new ADS on Hibiscus Coast Highway to guide drivers seeking the
Silverdale Centre, as requested.
4. Since
that date concerns have been raised by businesses and residents on the
appropriate nomenclature used on the signage and decision-making process. This
has resulted in vandalism of the signs which then had to be rectified at not
insignificant public cost.
5. In
addition, it has also been raised that ADS are inconsistent along Hibiscus
Coast Highway between Silverdale Street and the Millwater Parkway/ Whangaporaoa
Road Intersection.
6. To
address these concerns Auckland Transport is seeking a determination from the
Local Board on behalf of the Community on the correct nomenclature to be used
on the signage.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say “Silverdale
Village” at the intersection of Silverdale Street and “Silverdale
Town Centre” at the intersections with Wainui Road and Millwater
Parkway; OR
b) Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say “Silverdale
Town Centre”; OR
c) Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say
“Silverdale” without “Centre” or
“Village”.
|
Horopaki
Context
7. In
2018 Auckland Transport was requested by the SABA to update four advanced
directional signs on Silverdale Street and Hibiscus Coast Highway as they were
inconsistent and of poor quality. The previous signage had been altered to read
‘Silverdale Centre’, but the lettering used (and the spelling of
‘Centre’ on one of the signs) did not meet MOTSAM (Manual of
traffic signs and markings, NZTA) standards. There were also inconsistencies in
the naming between Silverdale Centre, Town Centre, and Village.
8. At
this stage several signs were replaced. However, other signage on Hibiscus
Coast Highway referring to Silverdale Town Centre (specifically at Wainui Road)
were not replaced.
9. The
decision on the use of ‘Silverdale Centre’ was supported by SABA
and the local board representatives involved in the SABA.
10. Subsequent
to the changes, Auckland Transport and the local board received complaints that
this signage was not the correct nomenclature.
11. There
have also been ongoing cases of vandalism of the signage. This represents
a safety risk and an ongoing cost to Auckland Transport.
Advanced
Destination Signage
12. ADS
is provided to assist drivers with wayfinding on the roading network.
Consistency of this information is important for drivers, to minimise confusion
and avoid potential safety issues.
13. Guidance on this signage is provided by NZTA MOTSAM Section 1
section 7.2, Advance Direction Signs. Auckland Transport has further guidance
through the Auckland Transport Code of Practice (ATCOP) section 10, Traffic
Signs & Road Markings, which builds on national guidance: “Good
signs will give accurate, clear and concise information at a time when the road
user is able to read, understand and react appropriately and safely. Clear and
efficient guide signing is an essential part of road and traffic engineering as
road users depend on these signs for information.”
14. ADS
are located on approaches to significant intersections to indicate the
destinations on each road leading away from the intersection including the next
major destination, where appropriate. They are used at key intersections on
Strategic Routes and Arterials in particular.
15. It
should be noted that these are different to place name signs. A place name sign
is used to indicate to drivers that they have arrived at the intended
destination. Examples of these include ‘Papakura’,
‘Orewa’, etc.
16. Auckland
Transport completed a Regional Destination Signage Strategy in 2013. This forms
the basis for the use of ADS in ATCOP. Through the strategy a place naming
hierarchy was developed based on national gazetted names and route naming
strategies in place.
17. This
identified three levels of destinations:
· Primary destinations
are main destinations, such as City Centre and Takapuna, which are significant
regional commercial, business and residential areas that often have historical
significance. They are signed along with Stage names over the full length of a
route
· Secondary
destinations can be district centres of lesser size that are signed to a lesser
extent.
· Tertiary
destinations are local destinations that are typically signed at one or two
intersections from the destination.
18. This
Strategy identified ‘Silverdale’ at a Primary level and noted that
there was legacy signage on Hibiscus Coast Highway for ‘Silverdale’
and ‘Silverdale Town Centre’.
19. Land
Information NZ (NZ Geographical Board) list of areas records this area as
‘Silverdale’ but as yet there does not appear to be an official
gazetted name for the area of the new development, aside from Silverdale. A
request was forwarded to Auckland Council for naming conventions in late 2019
but as yet no feedback has been received.
20. This
signage strategy is programmed to be reviewed in 2020/21, and changes to ADS
signage in this area potentially will also need to include new place names for
areas of development.
21. It
should also be noted that Auckland Council documents refer to Silverdale as a
Town Centre i.e. Auckland Unitary Plan, Silverdale Local Plan. On the Hibiscus
and Bays Local Board website it states that “Our main town centres are
Orewa, Silverdale, Whangaparaoa, Browns Bay and Mairangi Bay.”
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Appropriate
nomenclature
22. Given
that there is differing opinions within the community, Auckland Transport is
seeking a determination from the Local Board on the appropriate nomenclature
for the signage.
23. Auckland
Transport considers that the Local Board has the following options:
i. Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say “Silverdale
Village” at the Silverdale Street intersection and “Silverdale Town
Centre” at the Wainui Road and Millwater Parkway Intersections; OR
ii. Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say “Silverdale
Town Centre”; OR
iii. Request
that Auckland Transport update all the ADS signage to say
“Silverdale” without “Centre” or “Village”.
24. It
should be noted that:
· While a definition of
the Silverdale Village area is required if option a) is selected there is
likely to be confusion for drivers as there is no geographical definition of
Silverdale Village. Further signage would be required to denote the Silverdale
town centre/Centre.
· There is an existing Auckland Transport sign that says
‘Welcome to Silverdale Centre’ at the intersection with Silverdale
Street and Hibiscus Coast Highway. To avoid confusion this sign will be removed
by Auckland Transport.
· While the boards preference of nomenclature would appear on ADS
signage it does not prevent the local businesses / business association
installing their own local signage. This is what has been done in other
centres such as Birkenhead, North Harbour, etc. These signs are provided by business
associations, not Auckland Transport. However, Auckland Transport is happy to
work with a proposal to install in the road corridor as an encroachment.
· Auckland Transport
has no requirement to publicly consult on naming conventions and locations as
this is set out in ATCOP and the Regional Destination Signage therefore there
is no funding set aside for this purpose. If the Local Board determines that
public consultation was required, then this would have to be undertaken at the
Boards expense.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
25. This report
has no climate impacts.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
26. This report
has no wider impacts on the Council Group.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
27. This report
is seeking to determine the Local Board views.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
28. This report
has no impacts on Māori as a specific group.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
29. This report
has no financial implications for the Local Board.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
30. There is a
minor safety risk to be considered with vandalised signage, Auckland Transport
would seek to mitigate this risk with clear direction on the best outcome for
the Community.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
31. Following
determination from the Board, Auckland Transport will have to prioritise these
changes based on the available funding in our programme.
32. If the board
wished ensure this was delivered in a timely fashion they could consider
contributed funding to this from their transport capital funds.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Ben Halliwell - Elected Member
Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
|
|
Authorisers
|
Melanie Alexander - Traffic Operations
Manager. Auckland Transport
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Auckland Transport – Local Board
Transport Capital Fund Report November 2020
File No.: CP2020/17130
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek a resolution from the local board to approve the projects they wish
Auckland Transport to deliver from the Local Board Transport Capital fund (LBTCF).
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This
report covers:
· A
summary of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund
· A
timeline of the Local Board’s decision making with regards to the use of
this fund
· A
summary of Auckland Transports advice on projects that the board wishes to
progress
· Advice
on the financial implications of these decisions.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive
the Auckland Transport local board transport capital fund report November
2020
b) request
that Auckland Transport commits $246,000 from the Local Board’s
Transport Capital Fund to the 214
Hibiscus Coast Highway Signalised Crossing
c) request
that Auckland Transport commit $29,000 from the Local Board’s Transport
Capital Fund to the East Coast Bays Wayfinding Signage Project
d) request
that Auckland Transport commit $30,000 from the Local Board’s Transport
Capital Fund to complete design for the Orewa Boulevard Stage 3 project.
|
Horopaki
Context
3. The Local Board Transport Capital Fund
(LBTCF) is a capital budget established by the Governing Body to allow local
boards to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are
important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s (AT) work programme.
4. Projects must be safe, not impede network efficiency and be in the
road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if
there is a transport outcome).
5. At
the beginning of the electoral term there were several projects underway from
the previous term, that have all been completed since, except for the Orewa
Boulevard Stage Three project (Resolution HB/2019/134).
6. Following
the approval of the Emergency Budget in July 2020 a new level of funding was
outlined for the local board, with the Hibiscus and Bays local board receiving
a new total of $305,105 for the 2020/21 financial year.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Local Board Decision Making
7. At
its meeting on 19 March 2020 the local board requested (Resolution number
HB/2020/46) that AT provide scopes and rough order costs for the following
projects for potential funding through the local board’s transport
capital funding available for the 2019 – 2022 electoral term:
i) the installation of retractable bollards and improved pedestrian and
cycling environments
on Inverness, Clyde and Glen Roads, Browns Bay, to facilitate the use
of Inverness Road and the adjacent Village Green and community facilities as
a market venue and community focal point
ii) the
provision of appropriate signage and road markings at strategic locations entering
the villages of Mairangi Bay and Silverdale to denote that travellers are entering
and leaving these town centres
iii) options
for the installation of both a shared path and a footpath on Laurie Southwick
Parade, Hobbs Bay, from the roundabout to the Gulf Harbour Ferry Terminal,
excluding the area known as the Hammerhead
iv) undergrounding
of the existing overhead power lines on Beach Road, Browns Bay,
from its intersection with Argyle Road to its intersection with Anzac and Glencoe
Roads
v) installation
of a footpath from the intersection of Forge Road and East Coast Road,
Silverdale, on the eastern side of East Coast Road to Hibiscus Coast Highway
vi) installation
of a footpath on the western side of East Coast Road in the vicinity of Silverdale
Adventure Park, 2104 East Coast Road, Silverdale to improve the safety
of pedestrians who exit cars parked on East Coast Road and walk to the Adventure
Park facility
vii) installation
of a footpath from Hatfields Beach to Orewa, using existing paths available
through Alice Eaves Reserve, to complement the local board’s Greenways
Plans for the Alice Eaves Reserve area.
8. However,
following the approval of the Emergency Budget in July 2020 a new level of
funding was outlined for the local board, with the Hibiscus and Bays local
board receiving a new total of $305,105 for the 2020/21 financial year.
9. Given
the funding uncertainty there were also a number of administrative changes to
how the LBTCF was to be delivered, these included:
· With
budgets uncertain for 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 the local boards were unable to
combine future years allocations into a single project
· Local
boards were encouraged to target delivery of smaller projects or complete
design and documentation for a project that can be physically delivered in
2021/2022.
10. To
respond to the significant change in funding and administration the local board
had a workshop with AT on the 27th August 2020 the Board and the local board advised AT to proceed with:
· Orewa Boulevard – to complete all design,
documentation, consenting and Traffic Resolutions. The shared path within the
reserve could be completed as a stand-alone piece of infrastructure. This will
need to be investigated further. The cost for this is expected to be $180,000
· Mairangi Bay / Silverdale Strategic Signage
– to investigate strategic signage for Mairangi Bay only. The cost for
the previous Mairangi Bay / Silverdale project was $87,000 so Auckland
Transport will have to work with Auckland Council to produce a new cost.
11. However,
following the September 17th business meeting, the local board
updated this direction (resolution number HB/2020/111) to:
b) do not support the inclusion of Mairangi Bay / Silverdale
Strategic Signage project
for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Transport Capital Fund as these projects
can be delivered through other funding sources
c) direct Auckland Transport to investigate the following
options;
i) signalised pedestrian crossing near Estuary Arts (214
Hibiscus Coast Highway)
ii) the completion of the Boulevard design work
iii) signage of access ways in the Bays subdivision
iv) the colouration of Inverness Road adjoining the
village green
v) the Hillary Square
Carparking Improvements relating to the drive through (McDonalds)
and safety issues around Alice Avenue
d) request that Auckland Transport investigate delivering the
Estuary Arts (214 Hibiscus
Coast Highway) signalised crossing as a co-funded project.
12. This
investigation was completed and presented to the local board at a workshop on
the 8th of October. Following which the Board advised AT to proceed
with the following projects:
|
Priority
|
Name
|
Total
|
|
1
|
214 Hibiscus
Coast Highway Signalised Crossing
|
$246,000
|
|
2
|
Bays Wayfinding
Signage
|
$29,000
|
|
3
|
Orewa Boulevard
Stage 3 - Design
|
$30,000
|
|
Total
|
$305,000
|
13. Resolutions
to this effect are found above in the recommendations of this report.
14. The
advice provided by AT on these projects was as follows:
214 Hibiscus Coast Highway Signalised Crossing
15. This is a
current project within the Local Board’s Community Safety Fund list of
projects. Current status is as follows:
· Detailed
design is complete
· Consultation
is complete
· Traffic
Resolution approval is underway
· Firm
Estimate of Cost $246,000
Figure 1: Signalised crosing design
Orewa
Boulevard Stage 3 Project
16. The design of
this project is well advanced and as it is a previously committed contract, and
so close to completion, it should be completed this financial year. Estimated
costs to complete are $30,000
17. With the
changes to the available budget the local board may wish to look at delivering
the project in stages over future financial years.
Wayfinding Signage in the Bays
Subdivision
18. Without a
full investigation as to the number of walkways and need for signage, an
accurate costing of this work is not possible.
19. Previous
projects of this nature by other local boards have been initiated by a board
setting aside an amount of money, and physical work up to that value has been
installed. This is the quickest way to get delivery on the ground.
20. It is recommended
that the board allocate a sum between $30,000 and $50,000 if it wishes to
proceed with this work.
Figure 2: Example of wayfinding signage
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
21. Auckland
Transport engages closely with council on developing strategy, actions and
measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland
Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.
22. The above projects would all contribute towards improving outcomes
for active transport and therefore reducing Auckland’s carbon footprint.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
23. Auckland
Transport will follow established processes where decisions in this report
impact on other parts of the council group.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
24. The local board are the decision makers with regards to the
LBTCF. Auckland Transport administers the fund and provides technical advice.
25. Workshops regarding the use of the fund were held with the
board on:
· 13th
February 2020
· 12th
March 2020
· 14th
May 2020
· 27th August 2020
· 8th October 2020
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
26. The
proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for
Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and
opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
27. Following
the approval of the Emergency Budget in July 2020 the Hibiscus and Bays local
board has a total of $305,105 for the 2020/21 financial year in their
LBTCF.
28. The
total sums for the proposed projects are as follows:
|
Priority
|
Name
|
Total
|
|
1
|
214 Hibiscus
Coast Highway Signalised Crossing
|
$246,000
|
|
2
|
Bays Wayfinding
Signage
|
$29,000
|
|
3
|
Orewa Boulevard
Stage 3 – Design
|
$30,000
|
|
Total
|
$305,000
|
29. Following the local boards approval of the resolution this would
mean that the full allocation for the 2020/21 financial year is committed.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
30. Auckland
Transport will put risk management strategies in place on a project by project
basis.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
31. Following
approval of the recommendations Auckland Transport proceed to delivery of the
projects.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Ben Halliwell - Elected Member Relationship Manager,
Auckland Transport
|
|
Authorisers
|
Jonathan Anyon – Manager, Elected Member
Relationship Unit, Auckland Transport
Neil Prendiville – Programme Manager, Local
Board Transport Capital Fund, Auckland Transport
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Local board views on plan change to
enable rainwater tank installation for the Auckland region
File No.: CP2020/15806
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.[1]
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 Hibiscus and Bays
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 Hibiscus and Bays 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.[2]
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 Hibiscus and Bays 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).[3] 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
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Draft Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks
Management Plan – establishing the hearings panel
File No.: CP2020/16693
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
establish a hearings panel and appoint an independent commissioner to undertake
the hearings process for the draft Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks Management
Plan.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Submissions
on the draft Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks Management Plan (the draft plan)
closed on 4 September 2020, following the two-month submissions period required
by the Reserves Act 1977.
3. Approximately
210 submissions have been received on the draft plan and 21 submitters have requested
the opportunity to speak to their submission at a hearing.
4. This
report seeks approval from the local board to establish a hearings panel to
hear submissions on the draft plan.
5. We
recommend that the hearings panel consists of an independent hearings
commissioner and four local board members, two from each local board
subdivision. The panel will hear submissions, consider amendments and recommend
changes to the draft plan to the local board.
6. Establishing
a hearings panel consisting of a commissioner and local board members will
ensure Reserves Act expertise and a level of independence on the panel, whilst
retaining local knowledge, input and decision-making in the hearing process.
7. Subject
to making the decisions outlined in this report, the chair and deputy chair
will receive a shortlist of commissioners with the required expertise to select
from.
8. The
decision to approve the final plan remains with the local board.
Horopaki
Context
Background information
9. Hibiscus
and Bays Local Board (the local board) has decision-making responsibility for
local parks in the Hibiscus and Bays local board area.
10. The
Reserves Act 1977 (RA) requires a reserve management plan be developed for most
types of reserves administered by the local board. The local board has chosen
to develop a combined management plan covering most local parks held under the
RA and the Local Government Act 2002, within the local board area.
11. Once completed and adopted, the
local parks management plan establishes general policies and
park-specific intentions for the management of local parks. Adopting the local
parks management plan means the council will comply with the requirements of
the RA to have a management plan for each reserve it administers under the RA.
12. The local
board approved the draft Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks Management Plan (the
draft plan) for public notification on 19 March 2020. Notification triggers a
two-month consultation period followed by the opportunity for submitters to
speak to their submission at a hearing.
13. Due to the
Covid-19 pandemic response, public consultation on the draft plan was delayed
until July 2020.
14. The timeline
below gives an overview of key decisions in developing the draft plan:
15. Following
the close of public consultation on the draft plan on 4 September 2020, a
decision is now required from the local board on establishing the hearings
panel.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Brief overview of submissions received
16. The
draft plan was open for public feedback between 2 July and 4 September 2020.
17. The following
gives an overview of the number of submissions received on the draft plan:
|
Part of draft plan
|
Summary of
content
|
Number of
submissions received
|
|
Volume 1
|
Background information
Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board context
Management planning
framework
General policies
|
100
|
|
Volume 2
|
Individual parks
information and management intentions (230 parks)
|
110
Including 57 submissions
relate to Edith Hopper Reserve
|
· One
substantial submission covers both Volume 1 and 2, and provides comments on
over 200 parks (the submitter indicated they do not want to speak to their
submission)
18. 21
individuals and organisations have indicated that they would like to speak to
their submission at a hearing.
Hearings and decision making on the plan
19. The
local board can determine how to conduct the hearings process under section
41(10) of the Reserves Act 1977.
20. The local
board can choose whether the full local board, some members and/or independent
commissioners will hear submissions and make decisions on the final plan.
21. The table
below describes the various options for the composition of a hearings panel and
the decision making for the final plan (see Attachment A for the full
description of options and the options assessment).
|
Option
|
Description
|
|
Option 1 - Local board only
|
The full local
board hears submissions and makes decision on the management plan.
|
|
Option 2 - Local board panel with an independent
commissioner as chair
|
The local board
appoints a commissioner to chair a panel comprising of all or some of the
local board to hear the submissions and make recommendations to the local
board on required amendments to the draft plan following hearings.
The local board
would then make the decision on whether to support the recommendations.
|
|
Option 3 - Independent
commissioners hear submissions and make recommendations to the local board
|
The local board
appoints an independent panel comprising three commissioners to hear and consider
the submissions and make recommendations to the local board.
The local board
would make the decision whether to support the recommendations.
|
|
Option 4 - Appoint a committee to hear submissions
and make decisions
|
The local board
appoints a committee and delegates the decision-making on the management plan
to that committee.
The committee
would have a minimum of three members, at least one of whom is a member of
the local board, and an independent commissioner.
The committee
would hear submissions and make decisions on the management plan.
|
22. All options
except option 1 involve the use of commissioners.
23. The council
uses commissioners in a variety of situations, to provide varying levels of
independent consideration of submissions and decision-making, or where there is
the need for specialist or independent advice on the Reserves Act.
24. Under options
2 to 4, commissioners with knowledge and experience of the Reserves Act could
assist in guiding the decision-making for the draft plan.
25. Commissioners
also have a general understanding of te ao Māori and can provide guidance
about this. No specific submissions have been received about the use of te ao
Māori in parks management.
26. In assessing
which of the above options to recommend, staff have considered the following
factors:
· retaining
local knowledge, input and decision-making in hearing submissions and approving
the final plan
· ensuring
Reserves Act expertise on the panel
· ensuring
a level of independence during the hearings process
· cost.
Option 2 is recommended
27. Based on the
assessment of options, staff recommend option 2, with the local board
appointing a panel consisting of four local board members and an independent
commissioner, to:
· hear
objections and submissions from submitters on the draft plan
· make recommendations to the local board on:
i. amendments
to the draft plan following the hearings process, and
ii. the
extent to which objections and submissions are allowed or accepted or
disallowed or not accepted.
28. The decision
to approve the final Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks Management Plan remains with
the local board.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
29. The
decisions in this report are administrative and we anticipate them to have no
direct impact on greenhouse gas emissions.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
30. A
council project group has met regularly to support the plan development,
understand implications of the draft plan and ensure alignment with other
council plans and projects. This group included staff from Community
Facilities, Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community and Social Policy.
31. Other council
departments and Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) have provided
specialist input into the development of the draft plan including
Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Legal Services, Local Board
Services, Chief Sustainability Office and Auckland Transport.
32. Advice has
been received from the Hearings team about the hearings process and different
options for the hearings panel.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
Local impacts
33. The
composition of the hearings panel as recommended in option 2, provides for
34. local board
members to bring local knowledge.
35. The
combination of local board representation and an independent commissioner is
likely to result in better decisions being made for the future management of
local parks and reserves in the local board area.
Local board views
36. A
workshop was held with the local board on 22 October 2020 to discuss options to
establish the hearings panel and decision making on the final plan.
37. Local board
members present expressed a preference for option two, to establish a hearings
panel, consisting of an independent commissioner as chair and four local board
members (two from each of the local board’s subdivisions).
38. The hearings
panel would conduct the hearings, deliberating on submissions and make
recommendations to the local board about amendments to the draft plan. The
decision to approve the final plan will remain with the local board.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
39. The
Reserves Act is one of the Acts in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act
1987. In performing functions and duties under the Reserves Act, the local
board must give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi / te Tiriti
o Waitangi.
40. Obligations
under the Treaty / te Tiriti are overarching and not something to be considered
or applied after all other matters are considered.
41. The draft
plan acknowledges council’s obligation to iwi under the Treaty / te
Tiriti in local parks management planning. In developing the draft plan council
aimed to honour these obligations.
42. We invited
mana whenua to be involved in the development of the draft plan. This
opportunity was taken up by Ngāti
Manuhiri, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and Ngaati Whanaunga.
43. Points of
interest and input from mana whenua relate to the management of natural and
coastal areas, sites and areas of cultural significance and the ability for
mana whenua to provide input into future decisions on local parks.
44. Mana
whenua were notified that the draft plan was open for submissions. No
submissions were received from mana whenua at the close of the consultation
period.
45. Based on
discussions during the development of the draft plan the hearings panel could
choose to consult with mana whenua during the hearings process, if any issues
raised by submitters are of interest to mana whenua.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
46. There
are no cost implications from the recommended option for the local board. The
cost of appointing one commissioner for hearings is met from existing
operational budgets.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
47. We
have undertaken a risk assessment for this decision and no significant risks
have been identified.
48. The selection
of option two for the hearings panel, with an independent commissioner with Reserves
Act expertise and local board members, with local knowledge mitigates any
potential or perceived risks of conflict of interest, lack of independence,
local knowledge and technical expertise on the panel.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
49. Subject
to making the decisions as outlined in this report, the chair and deputy chair
will receive a shortlist of commissioners with the required expertise to select
from.
50. It is
anticipated that a hearing will be held in February/ March 2021. The hearings
panel will receive a summary of submissions and hearings report prior to the
hearings. Hearings will be followed by deliberations.
51. The hearings
panel will make recommendations to the local board. The local board will make
the decision on the final plan which anticipated to be in April/ May 2021.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Options for hearing and decison making on final plans
|
39
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Nicki Malone - Service and Asset Planner
Matthew Ward - Service & Asset Planning Team
Leader
|
|
Authorisers
|
Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and
Integration
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Parks Management
Plan - approving Reserves Act classifications following public notification
File No.: CP2020/16815
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To approve the declaration and classification of land as reserve,
and to reclassify reserves in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area
under the Reserves Act 1977, following the close of public submissions.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Classification
of reserve land is an essential step in preparing the Hibiscus and Bays Local
Parks Management Plan and a statutory requirement under the Reserves Act 1977
(RA).
3. Classification
will make clear the primary values of the reserve and the
types of activities that can take place on the land into the future. It
will create better consistency in the management of those primary values across
adjacent parcels and clarify the legal status of land.
4. A
report was presented to the local board on 19 March 2020 (see report in
Attachment A) to confirm the land status and classification of a number of land
parcels. The local board resolved to publicly notify a proposal to declare
reserve and classify one parcel of land and to reclassify six parcels of land
(Resolution e) and g) in number HB/2020/43 in
Attachment B).
5. Public
notification of the proposals was planned to take place in April 2020, but due
to Covid-19 public notification was delayed until July 2020.
6. The
period for public submissions closed on 7 August 2020 and no submissions were
received on the proposals. A resolution of the local board is now required to
approve the declaration and classification of land at Pōhutukawa
Reserve and the reclassification of six parcels of land as shown in Attachment
C.
7. The
public notice incorrectly included six additional land parcels to be declared
reserve and classified, for which the local board had made a decision to retain
under the Local Government Act 2002 (Resolution number a) (HB/2020/43) –
see Attachment B). No submissions were received on the incorrectly publicly
notified land parcels and they will continue to be held under the Local
Government Act.
8. Once
approved, staff will seek the approval of the Minister of Conservation
(delegated to the General Manager Community Facilities, Auckland Council) to
publish the changes in the New Zealand Gazette.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) approve
the declaration and classification of Section 1 SO 425793,
covering 105m2, held in CT 519300 and forming
part of Pōhutukawa Reserve as local purpose (esplanade) reserve, pursuant to section 14(1)
of the Reserves Act 1977
b) approve the reclassification of the six parcels or part parcels of
reserve land, pursuant to section 24 (2)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977, as
described in Attachment C to the agenda report (dated 5 November 2020).
|
Horopaki
Context
Classification programme
9. Classification
of reserve land is an essential step in preparing the Hibiscus and Bays Local
Parks Management Plan and a statutory requirement under the Reserves Act 1977
(RA).
10. Classification
will make clear the primary values of the reserve and the types
of activities that can take place on the land into the future. It will
create better consistency in the management of those primary values across
adjacent parcels and clarify the legal status of land.
11. A review of the land status and classification of parks and reserves
in Hibiscus and Bays has been undertaken as part of the development of the
Hibiscus and Bays Local Park Management Plan. A number of reports have been
prepared that have dealt with the classification of land under the Reserves
Act. The timeline below gives an overview of key decisions:
12. At the 19 March 2020 meeting, the local board approved the public
notification of:
· a
proposal to declare and classify Section 1 SO 425793, covering 105m2
and forming part of Pōhutukawa Reserve as local purpose (esplanade)
reserve
· proposals
to reclassify six parcels of land (as listed in Attachment C of this report).
13. Due to Covid-19 public notification was delayed and public notices
were published on 2 July 2020 in the North Shore Times and Rodney Times
in accordance with the requirements outlined in Section 119 (1)(b) of the
Reserves Act. The submission period closed on 7 August
2020. No submissions were received on the proposals.
14. A resolution
is required from the local board to confirm the classification and
reclassification actions now that public notification has closed.
15. The public
notice incorrectly included six additional land parcels to be
declared reserve and classified, for which the local board had made a decision
to retain under the Local Government Act 2002 (Resolution number a) (HB/2020/43)
– see Attachment B).
16. No
submissions have been received on these land parcels and no action is required
from the local board to correct this error. These parcels will
continue to be held under the Local Government Act.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
17. No
submissions were received on the proposals to declare and classify land at Pōhutukawa Reserve as local purpose (esplanade) reserve and
the reclassification proposals as shown in Attachment C.
18. The local board may choose to approve the proposed classification
actions as they were publicly notified; or to change those actions.
19. We recommend that the local board approve declaring and classifying
land at Pōhutukawa Reserve
and reclassifying the reserve parcels as proposed in
Attachment C.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
20. The decisions
in this report are largely administrative and we anticipate that they will have
no direct impact on greenhouse gas emissions.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
21. The impacts and views of classification on council groups was
outlined in the 19 March 2020 report. No additional impacts arise from the
decisions proposed in this report.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
Local Board views
22. Local board views on
classifications were described in the 19 March 2020 report and the
recommendations in this report are consistent
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
23. Mana whenua involvement and views on the proposed classifications and
reclassifications were described in detail in the 19 March 2020 report. Iwi supported the recommendations for classification and
reclassification.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
24. There are no
cost implications from this decision for the local board. Costs associated with
the gazettal of reserves will be funded through existing operational budgets.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
25. The following
table outlines the risks and mitigation associated with the classification and
reclassification of reserves, updated following the public notice period
closing.
|
Pre-notification risk
|
Post notification update
|
|
RA
classifications constrain the range of uses for land
|
The lack of
submissions on the proposed classifications and reclassifications mean no
additional risks around the range of uses contemplated have been
identified.
|
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
26. Once the
local board has approved the classification actions, they must be included in a
notice published in the New Zealand Gazette.
27. Approval of
gazette notices has been delegated from the Minister of Conservation to the
General Manager Community Facilities. A report will be prepared seeking
his signature to the gazette notices.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
19 March 2020 report to the Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board
|
45
|
|
b⇩
|
19 March 2020 Resolutions of the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
53
|
|
c⇩
|
Parcels to be reclassified under section 24
|
55
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Nicki Malone - Service and Asset Planner
Matthew Ward - Service and Asset Planning Team Leader
|
|
Authorisers
|
Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and
Integration
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
New Community Lease to The Scount
Association of NZ - Whangaparaoa Stanmore Bay
File No.: CP2020/17075
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
grant a new community lease to The Scout Association of New Zealand -
Whangaparaoa for its building situated at Stanmore Bay Reserve, Whangaparaoa.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The
Scouts Association of New Zealand – Whangaparaoa (Scouts) has submitted a
comprehensive new lease application for the group-owned building at Stanmore
Bay Park.
3. Scouts
previously held a lease with Auckland Council that commenced on 13 March 1978
to 12 March 1999 with one right of renewal which fully expired on 12 March
2020. Scouts now continue to operate on a month by month basis.
4. After
assessing the scout association’s new lease application, staff are
satisfied that the requirements under Auckland Council’s Community
Occupancy Guidelines 2012 have been met.
5. This
report recommends that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board grant a new community
lease to Scout Association of New Zealand. The recommendations within this
report aligns with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020 outcome: “Open
spaces to enjoy”.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That
the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) grant
a new community lease to The Scout Association of New Zealand - Whangaparaoa
for the premises situated at Stanmore Bay Reserve, comprising approximately
260m2, described as Lot 4 Deposited Plan 64710 (delineated in red
on Attachment A), subject to the following terms:
i. term – 10
years commencing on 13 March 2020 with one right of renewal for a further
term of 10 years
ii. final expiry
– 12 March 2040
iii. rent – $1.00
plus GST per annum if demanded
iv. all other terms and
conditions to be in line with the Reserves Act 1977 and Auckland
Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 (under review), including
a community outcomes plan or similar framework to measure community benefit
and club sustainability.
|
Horopaki
Context
6. This
report considers the issuing of a new community lease to
The Scout Association of New Zealand - Whangaparaoa for the footprint of
their building situated at Stanmore Bay Reserve, Whangaparaoa.
7. The
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local
recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing
matters.
Land, Buildings and Lease
8. The
Scout Association of New Zealand holds an operative community lease over part
of Stanmore Bay Reserve also known as Stanmore Bay Road Cemetery Road,
Whangaparaoa and described as Lot 4 Deposited Plan 64710, held
by the Crown through the Department of Conservation and vested in council, in
trust.
9. The area proposed to be leased to the Scout Association is for the
footprint of its building, consisting of approximately 260m2 as
shown by Attachment A, delineated in red and marked A.
10. The lease to the Scout Association is contemplated within the
Reserve Management Plan.
The Scout Association New
Zealand – Whangaparaoa
11. Scout
Association of New Zealand has been established for over 110 years providing
comprehensive outdoors-based programmes and educating boys and girls aged
predominantly five to 26, with life skills relating to problem-solving,
teamwork, citizenship, and healthy living.
12. The Scout
Movement is aimed at the physical, emotional, spiritual and mental development
of our young people, in a safe environment where they are encouraged to be
themselves, work together and thrive.
13. Some of the
activities include:
i. Camping
and tramping
ii. Rowing,
kayaking and other water-based activities
iii. Outdoor
safety skills
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
14. Auckland
Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 sets out the criteria for
community occupancy agreements.
15. Under the
guidelines, the club has an automatic right to reapply for a new lease at the
end of its occupancy term, a right which it is exercising. It is recommended
that a new lease be granted for a term of 10 years with one right of renewal
for a further term of 10 years, in accordance with the guidelines.
16. The local
board has discretion to vary the term of the lease if it wishes. The guidelines
suggest that where a term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms
contained in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.
17. After
assessing the lease application and meeting with the Scouts Association, staff
have determined that it qualifies for a new community lease by virtue of the
following:
i. The activity of the club supports the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board Plan 2020 outcome: “Open spaces to enjoy”
ii. Scouts
is not in breach of the current occupancy agreement
iii. Scouts’
financial accounts have a surplus with no known contingent liabilities
iv. Scouts
sustains its activities predominantly through membership and hirage fees
v. The
building meets the needs of the club and users of the courts.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
18. This proposal
falls within the “no impact” category, as it continues an existing
activity and does not increase current activation levels.
19. Climate
change has potential to impact the lease as the site is in close proximity to
the coast.
20. The site is
not in a flood plain, sitting just outside of the flood plain present
throughout the rest of Stanmore Bay Park. (Attachment B to the agenda report).
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
21. In compiling
the recommendations staff obtained input from Parks, Sports and Recreation and
Operational Management and Maintenance, and a new lease is supported.
22. The proposed
new lease has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The
views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation
of this report’s advice.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
23. This is an
approved item on the Community Facilities Work Programme for 2020/2021
(resolution number HB/2019/90).
24. The proposed
new lease to the Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated supports the
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020 outcome: “Open spaces to
enjoy”.
25. The land classification,
together with the reserve management plan, envision the park to be used for
recreation. Additionally, the lease to The Scout Association of New Zealand
– Whangaparaoa is contemplated in the Stanmore Bay Park Management Plan.
Consequently, staff do not foresee that there will be significant local impact.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
26. Auckland
Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi
which are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents
the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2015-2025, the Unitary Plan and local
board plans.
27. An aim of
community leasing is to increase targeted support for Māori community
development. This proposal seeks to improve access to facilities for all
Aucklanders, including Māori living in the Hibiscus & Bays Local Board
area.
28. There is no
change in land use being proposed and the lease to The Scout Association of New
Zealand – Whangaparaoa is contemplated in the Stanmore Bay Park
Management Plan.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
29. There are no
direct costs to council associated with this new community lease.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
30. If the
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolves not to grant the new lease to The Scout
Association New Zealand – Whangaparaoa, the Scouts ability to undertake
its core activities will be materially affected, which in turn will have a negative
impact on the wider community and the desired local board outcomes.
31. Additionally,
the activity is identified in the reserve management plan and is suited to
activate the recreational potential of the park.
32. As there is
no significant departure from the approved land use or change in activities,
there are no identified risks in granting the lease.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
33. Subject to
the local board granting a new community lease, council’s community
leasing staff will work with the club to formalise the lease agreement.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Attachment A Scouts Whangaparaoa Site Plan
|
61
|
|
b⇩
|
Attachment B Scouts Whangaparaoa Flood Plains
|
63
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Teukialupe Havea - Community Facilities Graduate
|
|
Authorisers
|
Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Community Facilities’ Sustainable
Asset Standard
File No.: CP2020/16729
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, but as part of this
project, is being put to the Governing Body for formal adoption as a regional
policy (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, the maintenance of which are
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
· 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 Hibiscus and Bays
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 the Long-term Plan, 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[4]
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[5]
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
|
71
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Toto Vu-Duc - Manager Community Leases
|
|
Authorisers
|
Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
Manoj Ragupathy - Acting General Manager Local Board
Services
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 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.: CP2020/16733
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
recommend that the Hibiscus and Bays 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 Hibiscus and Bays
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 Hibiscus and Bays 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
|
79
|
|
b⇩
|
The Specified Development Project process
|
81
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Local board views on Plan Change 53 -
Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct
File No.: CP2020/16740
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
invite the Hibiscus and Bays 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.[6]
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 Hibiscus and Bays
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 Hibiscus and Bays 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.[7]
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.[8]
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.[9]
The plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the
Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017.[10]
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 Hibiscus and Bays 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 - Team Leader Planning
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Approval for Private Road Names for
Subdivision at 207 - 249A & 257 Vaughans Road & 6 - 12 Piripiri Point
Drive, Okura
File No.: CP2020/16256
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To seek approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to name the private roads within the subdivision being undertaken by
Okura Holdings Limited, (the Applicant), at 207 - 249A & 257 Vaughans Road
and 6 - 12 Piripiri Point Drive Okura.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Auckland
Council has road naming guidelines that set out the requirements and criteria
of the Council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have
been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the
Auckland Region.
3. The Applicant has submitted the following
names in order of preference for consideration by the local board:
|
Accessway
1
|
Accessway
2
|
Accessway
3
|
|
Te Pae Okura Drive
|
Te Ika Roa Way
|
Pyes Lane
|
|
Reserve Drive
|
Pataka Lane
|
Tokanga Lane
|
|
Okura Drive
|
Gweebarra Bay
|
Antrim Bay
|
4. The names have been assessed in terms of the Council’s road
naming guidelines and those that meet the guidelines are as listed in the
recommendation below.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) approve the preferred road name for Accessway 1 as ‘Te Pae Okura Drive’ in the
report for the private roads within the subdivision being undertaken by Okura
Holdings Limited, (the Applicant), at 207 – 249A and 257 Vaughans Road
and 6 – 12 Piripiri Point Drive, Okura in accordance with section
319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974
b) approve the preferred road name for
Accessway 2 as ‘Te Ika Roa Way’ in the report for the private roads within the subdivision being
undertaken by Okura Holdings Limited, (the Applicant), at 207 – 249A
and 257 Vaughans Road and 6 – 12 Piripiri Point Drive, Okura in
accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974
c) approve the preferred road name for
Accessway 3 as ‘Pyes Lane’ in the report for
the private roads within the subdivision being undertaken by Okura Holdings Limited, (the Applicant), at 207 - 249A & 257
Vaughans Road and 6 - 12 Piripiri Point Drive Okura in
accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.
|
Horopaki
Context
5. The 29-lot subdivision, (Council Ref SUB60362415), was approved on
18 September 2020. The subdivision is a re-subdivision of the underlying
subdivision undertaken in 1972 and involved replacing
existing multiple access strips and their associated reciprocal rights of way
easements with a single access lot, (Lot 5000), with resultant minor
alterations to several boundaries of the existing lots. No additional
residential lots have been created by the subdivision.
6. Lot
5000 comprises three separate private roads referred to as Accessway’s 1,
2 and 3 in this report and which are to be re-named through this application.
7. The
underlying subdivision was developed by Hugh Green Group who unofficially named
the private roads as ‘Tir Conaill Lane’, ‘Gweebarra Bay’
and ‘Antrim Bay’ respectively.
8. The Applicant has upgraded the private roads and provided wastewater
and other services to the lots. No dwelling houses currently occupy the land.
9. In accordance with the national addressing standard the private roads
require a name as they each serve more than five lots.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
10. The
Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be
named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider / developer
shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for
the Local Board’s approval.
11. Auckland
Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect
one of the following local themes, with the use of Maori names being actively
encouraged.
· a historical or ancestral linkage to an
area,
· a particular landscape, environmental or
biodiversity theme or feature
· an existing (or introduced) thematic
identity in the area.
12. The
Applicant has chosen a suite of names they consider appropriate for the area
with two preferred Maori names and a preferred English name they consider
particularly relevant to the area.
13. In this regard the names and their relevance are as follows:
|
Proposed Names
|
Meaning
|
|
Accessway 1
Te Pae Okura
Drive (preferred)
|
This name choice is a suggestion from
Ngāti Manuhiri and means ‘the seat of Kura’ (female
ancestor).
|
|
Reserve Drive
(alternative)
|
The applicant has decided to name the whole
project ‘The Reserve’.
|
|
Okura Drive
(alternative)
|
This name choice is a suggestion from
Ngāti Manuhiri and is the name of an ancestor.
|
|
Proposed Names
|
Meaning
|
|
Accessway 2
Te Ika Roa Way
(preferred)
|
This name choice is a suggestion from
Ngāti Manuhiri and means ‘coastal fishing ground’.
|
|
Pataka Lane
(alternative)
|
This name choice is a suggestion from
Ngāti Manuhiri and means ‘kai resource area’.
|
|
Gweebarra Bay
alternative
|
This is the name that the accessway is
currently known as and is believed to be of Irish origin.
|
|
Proposed Names
|
Meaning
|
|
Accessway 3
Pyes Lane
(preferred)
|
The applicant discovered through reviewing an
archaeological report that the site is adjacent to Pyes Creek and wishes to
incorporate Pyes in the accessway name given it is linked to the area.
|
|
Tokanga Lane
(alternative)
|
This is name is a suggestion from Ngāti
Manuhiri and means ‘large flax basket used for large hui /
gatherings’.
|
|
Antrim Bay
(alternative)
|
This is the name that the accessway is
currently known as and is believed to be of Irish origin.
|
14. Land Information New Zealand, (LINZ) have reviewed the proposed
names and confirmed that with the exception of the names Okura Drive and Antrim
Bay, which are already in use within the recommended separation distance (25km)
in the region, the other names are suitable from their perspective as there are
no duplications within the wider Auckland region that could cause confusion for
emergency services and deliveries.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
15. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant
environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource
Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the
development.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
16. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on
other parts of the Council group. The views of Council controlled organisations
were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
17. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant
policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those
outlined in this report.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
18. The naming of roads is linked
to the Auckland Plan Outcome “A
Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference
in the world”. The use of
Māori names for roads, buildings
and other public
places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Māori identity. To aid Local Board decision making, the
‘Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines’ includes:
· The Objective of recognising ancestral linkages to
areas of land by engagement with mana whenua and the allocation of road names
as appropriate and a Principle that Māori road
names are actively encouraged
· An agreed process to enable mana whenua to provide
timely feedback on all proposed road names in a manner they consider
appropriate.
19. The Applicant consulted directly with Ngāti
Manuhiri who made several suggestions from
which the Applicant has selected Te Pae Okura Drive, Te Ika Roa Way, Pataka
Lane and Tokanga Lane for the Boards consideration.
20. All
the suggested road names proposed in this report have been provided to all
other mana whenua for consideration through the Council’s Central
Facilitator Service.
21. No other mana whenua groups offered comment on the Applicants names.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
22. The
road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.
23. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate
signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new
road names.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
24. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a
routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a
key part of the process.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
25. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand
which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which
includes street addresses issued by councils.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
207 - 249A 257 Vaughans Road Okura - Attachment
A - Locality Map
|
95
|
|
b⇩
|
207 - 249A 257 Vaughans Road Okura - Attachment
B - Scheme plan of Subdivision
|
97
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
John Benefield, Senior Subdivision
Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Panuku Development Auckland- Hibiscus
and Bays Local Board Six-Monthly Report 01 March to 31 August 2020.
File No.: CP2020/14401
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
update the Hibiscus and Bays 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 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area during the stated time period. Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs) are legally required to
prepare six-monthly and annual reports containing financial and other
information about their performance. By reporting clearly the record of events,
this report enables the council, and Panuku, to meet its legislative reporting
obligations and also satisfy New Zealand Stock Exchange obligations. No
decisions are to be made from this report.
3. The Auckland Plan sets out, among other things, reporting requirements
(statutory or otherwise), audit and risk reporting requirements, attendance at
council meetings, and the process for buying, managing and selling assets.
4. Panuku collaborates with other CCOs, government and non-governmental
organisations as appropriate to obtain positive outcomes for Auckland.
5. Panuku is charged with balancing our obligation to deliver returns
for council with ensuring our regeneration projects are good quality, strategic
and better for the environment.
6. The activities of Panuku cover four broad areas:
· urban
regeneration of particular neighbourhoods, as determined by Auckland Council
· review
of, and where appropriate, redevelopment of council non-service property
· management
of council property assets including commercial, residential, and marina
infrastructure
· other property related services such as service property
optimisation (such as redevelopment incorporating a service delivery function),
strategic property advice, acquisitions and disposals.
7. The Auckland Council Group (‘the council group’) is made
up of Auckland Council, and five substantive council-controlled organisations
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 17 commercial and residential interests
in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area.
15. No properties
were purchased in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area during the six month
reporting period.
16. No properties
were sold in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area during the six month
reporting period.
17. 25 Properties in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area are currently under review as part of our rationalisation process.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive the Panuku Development Auckland -
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Six-Monthly Report 01 March to 31 August 2020.
|
Horopaki
Context
18. Panuku
helps to rejuvenate parts of Auckland, from small projects that refresh a site
or building, to major transformations of town centres or neighbourhoods.
19. The
Auckland Plan is the roadmap to deliver on Auckland’s vision to be a
world-class city, Panuku plays a significant role in achieving the ‘Homes
and Places’ and ‘Belonging and Participation’ outcomes.
20. Panuku
leads urban redevelopment in Manukau, Onehunga, Wynyard Quarter, Waterfront,
Northcote, Avondale, Takapuna, Henderson, Old Papatoetoe, Ormiston, Panmure,
Pukekohe, the City Centre and redevelopment of the Haumaru Portfolio.
21. Panuku
manages around $3 billion of council’s non-service property portfolio,
which is continuously reviewed to find smart ways to generate income for the
region, grow the portfolio, or release land or property that can be better used
by others. ‘Non-service properties’ are council-owned properties
that are not used to deliver council, or CCO, services.
22. As at 31 August 2020, the Panuku-managed non-service property
portfolio comprises 1,674 properties, containing 998 leases. This includes
vacant land, industrial buildings, warehouses, retail shops, cafes, offices,
medical centres and a large portfolio of residential rental homes.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
23. Panuku
is contributing commercial input into approximately fifty region-wide
council-driven renewal and housing supply initiatives.
24. Panuku
works with partners and stakeholders over the course of a project. It also
champions best practice project delivery, to achieve best value outcomes within
defined cost, time and quality parameters.
25. Below
is a high-level update on activities in the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board area:
26. 20 Link Crescent, Whangaparaoa, named
“Mariner Rise” the subdivision provides 60 Sections along with a
reserve and playground. 54 homes are completed or under construction. The
remaining 4 will be constructed once sale and purchase agreements are signed,
due to be completed by June 2021.
27. The
subdivision has resource consent for a mix of two, three and four-bedroom
terrace and standalone family homes with a focus on design quality. The homes
are being built and marketed by Signature Homes, Mike Greer Homes and New
Dreamland, priced $650,000 to $800,000.
28. Penlink. The former Rodney
District Council acquired a number of properties for a legacy Whangaparāoa
Road widening project.
The Whangaparāoa Road widening project is not included as a funded project
in the Regional Land Long Term Plan (RLTP) 2018-2028 or in the Auckland
Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) 2018. And AT has confirmed the
properties are not required for Penlink.
29. Internal consultation for the properties was
undertaken in March 2019. No public work requirement was identified.
30. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has requested
the retention of the properties for transport-related purposes (Penlink). In
the event the properties are approved for disposal, the Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board is also seeking to ring-fence sales proceeds for a transport purpose
(Penlink).
31. The properties are included in Schedule C of the
Emergency Budget asset recycling programme. Sale as part of that programme is
on hold pending the results of AT investigations into Whangaparāoa Road
transport issues.
Properties managed in the Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board Area
32. Panuku
currently manages six commercial and 11 residential
interests within the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area.
Service Property Optimisation
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. 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.
36. 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
37. 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.
38. 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
39. 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
40. 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.
41. 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
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. No properties have been purchased in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area during the reporting period for open space.
Disposals
45. 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.
Additionally, on behalf of the Auckland Council,
Panuku negotiated the sale of 50 Centreway Road, for $15.1m.
The team also secured a fixed term lease for council occupancy through to
FY23/FY24, desired employment opportunities created by the new development. We
also secured permanent access to the council owned Centrestage facility.
Centrestage is a theatre located behind 50 Centreway Road, Orewa to which
access to the facility can only be across 50 Centreway Road, Orewa.
46. 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.
47. No properties have been sold in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area during the reporting period.
Under review
48. Properties currently under review in the Hibiscus and Bays 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
|
|
Sec 1 SO 427897 and Sec 2 SO 427897 Albatross Road, Red Beach
|
Two
parcels of former road reserve comprising 18m² each that are not required
for open space purposes.
The reserve status was revoked in
2010.
The parcels were included in
Schedule A of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset recycling programme
and approved for sale by the Finance and Performance in July 2020.
|
|
4 and 6 Brightside Road, 472, 474, 476, 478, 480, 482, 484, 486, 488,
1/490, 2/491, 492, 494, 496, 498, 498B, 500, 502, 599, 616A Whangaparāoa
Road, Stanmore Bay
and
750A Whangaparāoa Road, Manly
|
The
Whangaparāoa Road widening project is not included as a funded project
in the Regional Land Long Term Plan (RLTP) 2018-2028 or in the Auckland
Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) 2018. AT confirmed the properties are not
required for Penlink.
The internal consultation for the
subject properties was undertaken in March 2019. No public work requirement
was identified.
The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
has requested the retention of the properties for a transport-related purpose
(Penlink). In the event the subject properties are approved for disposal, the
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board is also seeking to ring-fence sales proceeds
for a transport purpose (Penlink).
The subject properties are
included in Schedule C of the Auckland Council Emergency Budget asset
recycling programme. Disposal as part of that programme is on hold pending
the results of AT investigations into Whangaparāoa Road transport
issues.
|
Housing for Older People - Haumaru
Housing
49. The council
owns 1,452 units located in 63 villages across Auckland, which provide
rental housing to low income older people in Auckland.
50. The Housing
for Older People (HfOP) project involved Auckland Council partnering with a
third-party organisation, The Selwyn Foundation, to deliver social rental
housing services for older people across Auckland.
51. The joint
venture business, named Haumaru Housing, took over the tenancy, facilities and
asset management of the portfolio, under a long-term lease arrangement from 1
July 2017.
52. Haumaru
Housing was granted community housing provider (CHP) status in April 2017.
Having CHP registration enables Haumaru to access the government’s Income
Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) scheme.
53. Auckland
Council has delegated Panuku to lead a new multi-year residential development
programme.
54. The
following Haumaru Housing villages are located within
the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area:
|
Village
|
Address
|
Number of units
|
|
Torbay Flats
|
4 Wairere Road, Torbay
|
18
|
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
55. The Panuku urban regeneration programmes support the regeneration of
existing town centres while also addressing climate mitigation and adaptation.
56. 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.
57. 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 Hibiscus and Bays 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
58. 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
59. Any local or
sub-regional impacts related to local activities are considered on a project by
project basis.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
60. 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.
61. Panuku
continues to partner with Māori on opportunities which enhance Māori
social and economic wellbeing.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
62. There are no financial implications associated with this report.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
63. There are no risks associated with receiving this report.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
64. The next
six-month update is scheduled for March 2021.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Perin Gerrand - Engagement Coordinator
|
|
Authorisers
|
Joanna Glasswell - Head of Corporate Affairs
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Addition to the 2019-2020 Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board meeting schedule
File No.: CP2020/15808
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
seek approval for meeting dates to be added to the 2019-2020 Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate order to accommodate
the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 timeframes.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board Local Board adopted the 2016-2019 meeting schedule on 12
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 a meeting date as an addition to the
2019/2020 local board meeting schedule so that the modified 10-Year Budget
2021-2031 timeframes can be met.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) approve
the addition of one meeting date to the 2019-2020 Hibiscus and Bays Local
Board meeting schedule to accommodate the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 timeframes
as follows:
i) Thursday
3 December 2020, 5.00pm at the Orewa Service Centre, 50 Centreway Road,
Orewa.
|
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
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board adopted its 2019-2020 business meeting schedule
at its 12 December 2019 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
board is being asked to make decisions in early-December, early-May and
mid-June to feed into the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 process. These timeframes
are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
10. The local
board has two choices:
i) add
the meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule
or
ii) add
the meeting as an extraordinary meeting.
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 topics (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 an
additional meeting and consider whether to approve it as an extraordinary
meeting or an addition 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
1. If the local board decides not to add this business meeting to their
schedule this will cause:
a) delay
to the 10-Year Budget 2021-2031 process, which would result in the input of
this 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
19. Implement the
processes associated with preparing for business meetings.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Gemma Kaldesic - Democracy Advisor, Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Governance forward work calendar
File No.: CP2020/17036
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
present to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board with a governance forward work
calendar.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
1. This
report contains the governance forward work calendar, a schedule of items that
will come before the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board at business meetings and
workshops over the coming months until the end of the electoral term. The
governance forward work calendar for the local board is included in Attachment
A to the agenda report.
2. 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
· clarifying the
rationale for reports.
3. The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be
reported back to business meetings. It is recognised that at times items will
arise that are not programmed. Local board members are welcome to discuss
changes to the calendar.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive
the governance forward work calendar for November 2020.
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Governance Forward Work Programme November 2020
|
113
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Gemma Kaldesic - Democracy Advisor, Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November 2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board workshop
records
File No.: CP2020/17037
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. Attached
are the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board workshop records for 8, 22 and 29 October
2020.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) note
the workshop records for 8, 22 and 29 October 2020.
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Workshop records November 2020
|
117
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Gemma Kaldesic - Democracy Advisor, Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Members' Reports
File No.: CP2020/17039
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
provide an opportunity for members to update the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
on matters they have been involved in over the last month.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. An
opportunity for members of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to provide a
report on their activities for the month.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) receive
the reports from members A Poppelbaum and J Fitzgerald.
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Alexis Poppelbaum_Browns Bay Business Association
Executive
|
121
|
|
b⇩
|
Janet Fitzgerald_Destination Orewa Beach
|
123
|
|
c⇩
|
Janet Fitzgerald_Silverdale Business Association
|
125
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Gemma Kaldesic - Democracy Advisor, Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Deputations update
File No.: CP2020/17040
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. As
part of its monthly community forum, Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has set
aside time for deputations/presentations during which time members of the
public can address the local board on matters within the local board’s
delegated authority.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Under
Standing Orders there is provision for deputations/presentations to the local
board. Applications for deputations/presentations must be in writing setting
forth the subject and be received by the Relationship Manager at least seven
working days before the meeting concerned. Subsequently, requests for deputations
are considered and approved by the local board chairperson.
3. Requests,
matters arising and actions from the deputations/presentations are recorded and
updated accordingly. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board deputations/presentations
update is attached as attachment A to the agenda report.
|
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board:
a) note
the deputation update for 1 October 2020.
|
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Deputation Update November 2020
|
129
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Gemma Kaldesic - Democracy Advisor, Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board
Services
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
ATTACHMENTS
Item 8.1 Attachment a 19 November 2020 -
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board, Deputation: Whangaparaoa Hub Trust Page 133
Item 9.1 Attachment a 19 November 2020 -
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board, Public Forum: Lorraine Sampson
Page 145
|
Hibiscus and
Bays Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
|
Hibiscus and Bays
Local Board
19 November
2020
|
|
Local
Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, ss15-16.
Local
Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Part 1A, clause 36D.
Resource
Management Act 1991, section 8.
Schedule of Issues of
Significance and Māori Plan 2017, Independent Māori Statutory Board
