Agenda of Māngere-ŌtāhuhuLocal Board

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 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 - CLM Community Sport 5

9 Public Forum 5

9.1 Public Forum - Radonich Park Garden 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Governing Body Member Update 7

12 Local Board Leads and Appointments Report 9

13 Chairpersons Report and Announcements 11

14 Auckland Transport Report November 2020 13

15 Auckland Transport - Innovating Streets Decisions November 2020 report 21

16 New community leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East 33

17 Proposed exchange of reserve land at Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park - Māngere East and West 49

18 Outline of the landowner approval process and grant of landowner approval for a wastewater connection through John McAnulty Reserve, Ōtāhuhu 59

19 Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard 75

20 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 83

21 Local board views on Plan Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct 93

22 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Workshop Notes 99

23 Governance Forward Work Calendar 107

24 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

25 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 111

C1 Acquisition of land for open space - Māngere 111

1 Welcome

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 21 October 2020, as a true and correct.

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 - CLM Community Sport

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) thank Peka Manase from CLM Community Sport for his attendance.

9 Public Forum

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

9.1 Public Forum - Radonich Park Garden

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. Alani Taione would like to discuss with the board the possibility of having more garden at Radonich Park.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) thank Alani Taione for his presentation and attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

Local Board Leads and Appointments Report

File No.: CP2020/15485

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. This item allows the local board members an opportunity to present verbal and written updates on their lead rolls, such as relevant actions, appointments and meetings.

Topic Area	Lead	Alternate
Infrastructure and Environmental Services	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Arts, Community and Events (including libraries)	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community Facilities	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1^st Anae Dr Neru Leavasa 2^nd Christine O’Brien
Local planning, housing, and heritage – includes responding to resource consent applications on behalf of board	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	1^st Togiatolu Walter Togiamua 2^nd Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Transport	Makalita Kolo	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Economic development	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	1^st Christine O’Brien 2^nd Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Youth, Children, Seniors and Uniquely Abled	Anae Dr Neru Leavasa	1^st Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2^nd Christine O’Brien
Landowner Consents (excluding filming)	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua (until 27/4/21) Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich (from 28/4/21)
Landowner Consents Filming	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Events (receive staff notifications of areas that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk)	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Liquor Licences Hearings	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Resource Consent (proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application)	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua (until 27/4/21) Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich (from 28/4/21)
Resource Consents (notified hearings)	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua (until 27/4/21) Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich (from 28/4/21)
Area Plan Working Group	MOLB All board members OPLB Apulu Reece Autagavaia, Dawn Trenberth
LGNZ (Local Government New Zealand	Chairperson	Deputy Chairperson

Organisation / Initiative	Lead	Alternate
Community Impact Forum for Kohuora Corrections Facility	Makalita Kolo
Mangere Bridge BID	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Mangere Town Centre BID	Makalita Kolo
Mangere East Village BID	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Otahuhu Business Association	Christine O’Brien
South Harbour Business Association BID	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Auckland Airport Community Trust for Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Te Pukaki Tapu O Poutukeka Historic Reserve & Associated Lands Co-Management Committee	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Ambury Park Centre	Anae Dr Neru Leavasa	Christine O’Brien
Mangere Mountain Education Trust	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Tamaki Estuary Environmental Forum	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Youth Connections South Local Governance Group (3 members)	Makalita Kolo, Harry Fatu Toleafoa, Anae Dr Neru Leavasa	Christine O’Brien
Maori input into local board decision-making political steering group	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Ōtāhuhu Portage Project Steering Group	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
The Southern Initiative (TSI) Steering Group	Lemauga Lydia Sosene	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) receive the verbal and written reports from local board members.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors	Janette McKain - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport November Report	15

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport - Innovating Streets Decisions November 2020	23
b ⇩	Draft governance agreement innovating streets	29

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

New community leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East

File No.: CP2020/15976

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new community lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere.

2. To grant a new community lease to Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated

3. Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated holds an existing community lease for the group-owned premises located at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere.

4. The lease commenced on 1 May 1995 and reached final expiry on 30 April 2015. The lease is holding over on a month-by-month basis until terminated or a new lease is granted.

5. The tennis club’s aim is to foster, promote and participate in tennis matches, competitions and other sports games and activities; to encourage healthy recreation and social interaction for its members.

6. After assessing the tennis club’s new lease application, staff are satisfied that the requirements under Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 have been met.

7. Iwi engagement has been undertaken and public notification will follow subject to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board’s approval of the recommendations below.

8. This report recommends that a new community lease be granted to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated, in accordance with the terms and conditions under Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977.

Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated

9. Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated holds a current community lease for the group-owned building located at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East.

10. The lease commenced on 1 September 1992 and reached final expiry on 31 August 2012. The lease is holding over on a month-by-month basis until terminated or a new lease is granted.

11. The football club’s aim is to nurture and grow the game of soccer in Māngere and its surrounding communities. The group has become a well-established community and organisation, providing sport and recreation to the local community for over 56 years.

12. After assessing the football club’s new lease application, staff are satisfied that the requirements under Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 have been met.

13. As the provision of soccer is contemplated in the Manukau Sports Parks Management Plan for Walter Massey Park, iwi engagement and public notification is not required for the proposed lease.

14. This report recommends that a new community lease be granted to Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated, in accordance with the terms and conditions under Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) note public notification of Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere

b) delegate to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Chairperson the authority to appoint a hearings panel to consider any objections received, following the public notification, and for the panel to reach a decision

c) grant, subject to any objections being resolved, under Section 54(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977, a new community lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated for the group-owned premises comprising 3158 square meters (more or less) located at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere (outlined in red on Attachment A) on the land described as Part Lot 4 Deposited Plan 13141 subject to the following terms:

i) term - five years commencing 18 November 2020, with one (1) five-year right of renewal commencing 18 November 2025, effecting final expiry on 17 November 2030

ii) rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded

iii) all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012

d) approve the Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated’s Community Outcomes Plan, as provided in Attachment B, for inclusion as the Third Schedule of the lease agreement

e) grant, under Section 54(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977, a new community lease to Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated for the group-owned building comprising 436 square meters (more or less) located at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East (as outlined in red on Attachment C) on the land described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 46978 subject to the following terms:

i) term - 10 years commencing 18 November 2020, with one (1) 10 year right of renewal commencing 18 November 2030, effecting final expiry 17 November 2040

ii) rent - $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded

iii) all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Reserves Act 1977

f) approve the Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated’s Community Outcomes Plan, as provided in Attachment D, for inclusion as the Third Schedule of the lease agreement.

Horopaki

Context

15. This report considers the new community leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated for its premises located at House Park, 241R Kirkbride Road, Māngere and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated for its building located at Walter Massey Park, 394R Massey Road, Māngere East.

16. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

Land, Assets, Lease and Group Information

Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated

17. The tennis club holds an existing community lease over its premises at House Park, Māngere. The land is legally described as Part Lot 4 Deposited Plan 13141, held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve, subject to the Reserves Act 1977. As the park does not have a management plan, public notification and formal iwi engagement is required under the Act.

18. If any objections to the proposed lease are received, a hearings panel of the local board will be convened to consider the objections and reach a decision.

19. The building, tennis courts and lighting is owned by the tennis club, which is also responsible for all maintenance of the leased area.

20. The area proposed to be leased to the tennis club consists of approximately 3158 square meters (more or less) and is outlined in red on Attachment A.

21. The tennis club was established in the 1970s and registered as an incorporated society on 21 March 1975. The group is affiliated with both Tennis Auckland and Tennis New Zealand and has approximately 55 full-time and casual members aged from five years to those in their 60s. Most members are aged between 22 and 60 plus.

22. The group fields teams across senior and junior grades. The club has a promising junior grade with a full coaching programme.

23. The tennis club and CLM Community Sport Counties Manukau are collaborating to undertake a holiday programme for juniors that will benefit the community in providing free and fun tennis activities to children who may otherwise have very limited choices due to financial constraints.

24. The group boast five floodlit tennis courts and supports the community by making its facility available for hire to help and support initiatives and activities within the local community, sport clubs and community organisations.

25. The tennis club continues to be involved in the local community and offers a family-orientated club that encourages participation, enjoyment and personal development for its members.

Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated

26. The football club holds a current community lease over the group-owned building at Walter Massey Park, Māngere East. The land is legally described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 46978, held by the Crown through Department of Conservation as a classified recreation reserve and vested in Auckland Council in trust for recreational purposes, subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

27. The provision of soccer is contemplated in the Manukau Sports Parks Management Plan relating to the park and adopted in 2007.

28. The building is owned by the football club which is responsible for all maintenance of the leased area.

29. The area proposed to be leased to the football club consists of approximately 436 square meters (more or less) and is outlined in red on Attachment C.

30. The football club was established in 1964 and registered as an incorporated society on 12 March 1968. The group is affiliated with Northern Region Football and has approximately 400 members aged from preschoolers to those over 50 years. Most members are aged between 14 and 21 years.

31. The group fields approximately 22 teams across junior, youth and senior grades. In recent years the senior men’s, women’s and youth teams have been successful and winning their respective leagues. The football club has a robust and promising junior grade together with a full coaching programme staffed by professional coaches.

32. The group supports Manukau United Football Club Incorporated, a partnership club representing south Auckland communities in the Northern Region Football League (premier division) and in regional youth and senior women's competitions. Manukau United provides community football engagement and an elite football pathway for youth, men and women in the south Auckland region.

33. The two foundation clubs that formed Manukau United where Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated and Mangere United Soccer Club Incorporated located at Centre Park, Māngere East.

34. The football club also supports the community by making its facility available for hire, to help and support initiatives and activities pertaining to the local community, sport clubs and community organisations.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

35. The groups’ lease applications were assessed against the criteria contained in the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the priorities set by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017.

36. Under the guidelines, groups that own their own buildings have an automatic right to re‑apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term, a right which each group is exercising.

37. The local board has discretion to vary the term of the lease if it wishes. However, the guidelines suggest that where the term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms within the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Community lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club

38. It is recommended that a new lease be granted to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated for a term of five years, with one right of renewal for a further term of five-years, in accordance with the guidelines. The shorter-term community lease is to allow the group time to implement initiatives and strategies to increase delivery of services while maintaining a regular review.

39. Staff have determined that the tennis club meets the requirements under the guidelines to qualify for a new community lease as shown below.

40. The tennis club:

· is registered as an incorporated society

· has an open membership criteria

· caters to a well-defined group in the local community and its services are utilised

· sustains its activities predominantly through membership subscriptions, fundraising, donations and grants

· premises meets the needs of the group and other users of the facility.

41. The building, tennis courts and lighting are owned by the tennis club, which is also responsible for all maintenance within the leased area. A site visit undertaken indicated that the premises is in satisfactory condition and meets the needs of the group’s users.

42. The tennis club has a scheduled maintenance plan in place to address general maintenance and renewals of its premises.

43. A community outcomes plan has been negotiated with the tennis club that identifies the benefits the group will provide to the community. This is provided in Attachment B and will be attached as a schedule to the lease agreement.

Community lease to Manukau City Association Football Club

44. It is recommended that a new lease be granted to Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated for a term of 10 years, with one right of renewal for a further term of 10 years, in accordance with the guidelines.

45. Staff have determined that the football club meets the requirements under the guidelines to qualify for a new community lease as evidenced below.

46. The football club:

· is registered as a legal entity with a not-for-profit status

· has an open membership criteria

· has a history of delivering quality services to the local community

· sustains its activities predominantly through membership subscriptions, fundraising, donations, grants, holiday programmes, minor sponsorships and facility hireage at a community rate

· is managed appropriately as evidenced by its longevity and extent of the programmes offered.

47. The building is owned by the football club, which is also responsible for all maintenance within the leased area. A site visit undertaken indicated that the building is in satisfactory condition and meets the needs of the group’s users.

48. The football club has a maintenance plan to address general maintenance and renewals of its building as the need arises and budget allows.

49. A community outcomes plan has been negotiated with the football club that identifies the benefits the group will provide to the community. This is provided in Attachment D and will be attached as a schedule to the lease agreement.

50. As the land is owned by the Crown, the treaty clause will apply in the lease agreement notifying the contracting parties in the event of a successful claim being made for the land to be used as redress purposes, pursuant to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

51. There is no impact on greenhouse gas emissions as both proposals do not introduce any new sources of emissions.

52. Climate change impacts will need to be considered in any future planning for the area occupied by Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated. A small part of the groups leased areas sits directly within a flood water (river or surface flooding) zone as a result of a 1‑in-100-year rainstorm event.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

53. Staff have obtained support from colleagues in Active Recreation also Parks Services (Parks, Sports and Recreation), Area Operations (Community Facilities) and Community Empowerment. No concerns were raised regarding the new leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated.

54. The proposed new leases have no identified impact 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

55. The assessment of the applications was workshopped with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board portfolio leads on 2 July 2020. The portfolio leads provided informal support for the proposed shorter-term new community lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and a new community lease to Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated.

56. The recommendations in this report fall within local board’s allocated authority to grant community leases in line with the Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

57. The recommendations within this report support the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017 outcome of:

· Facilities to meet diverse needs (Outcome 5).

58. The proposed leases will benefit the community in enabling initiatives that promote the preservation and encourage the growth and spread of tennis and football in Māngere and its surrounding communities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

59. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi which are articulated in council’s key strategic planning documents the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan, the Unitary Plan and local board plans.

60. An aim of community leasing is to increase targeted support for Māori community development. The proposals seek to improve access to facilities for all Aucklanders, including Māori living in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

61. The groups encourage participation of Māori through local programmes and this forms part of their community outcomes plan commitments.

62. Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated each acknowledge the place of mana whenua within Aotearoa and values initiatives that are inclusive and enhances partnership and participation of all people including Māori. Further, Māori members are supported to take up leadership positions throughout the organisations from the executive committee and coaching to volunteering.

63. Iwi engagement was undertaken on 8 October 2020 and involved a formal, written correspondence detailing information regarding the proposed new lease to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated, and forwarded to iwi representatives allowing 20 working days to respond.

64. No objections to the proposal was received. Furthermore, the above meets the statutory requirements under section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 that council engage with mana whenua representatives. Mana Whenua will also have an opportunity to provide feedback regarding the proposed lease to the tennis club during the public notification process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

65. All costs relating to the advertising of the intention to lease and preparation of the lease agreements are borne by Community Facilities.

66. Staff have obtained support from Financial, Strategy and Planning. No concerns were raised regarding the financial implications for the new leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

67. Should the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolve not to grant new community leases to Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated, it will inhibit each groups’ ability to undertake their core activities which will have a negative impact on the local board outcomes.

68. As there is no significant departure from the land use or change in activities; there are no identified risks in granting the leases.

69. Additionally, there is risk in relation to the buildings and improvements where council may be liable for assets where budget is neither allocated nor identified in council’s key strategic planning documents.

70. The new lease affords the groups’ security of tenure, enabling them to attend to the scheduled maintenance of its facilities. If the leases are not granted, the groups’ ability to maintain its premises will be severely impacted.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

71. Subject to the local board’s approval, public notification will be undertaken. On completion of the public notification, and subject to the resolution of any objections, staff will engage with Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated and Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated to finalise the lease agreements.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site Plan for Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated	41
b ⇩	Community Outcomes Plan for Mangere Combined Tennis Club Incorporated	43
c ⇩	Site Plan for Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated	45
d ⇩	Community Outcomes Plan for Manukau City Association Football Club Incorporated	47

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tai Stirling - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

Proposed exchange of reserve land at Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park - Māngere East and West

File No.: CP2020/15268

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek the views of the local board on the proposal to exchange reserve land at Watchfield Close (101m²) and at Mayflower Park (1619m²) with comparable Kāinga Ora land.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board (May 2020) and Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee (June 2020) approved public notification proposals to:

· exchange 101m² of reserve land on Watchfield Close, currently used as a walkway to Moyle Park, for a new walkway of 336m² also on Watchfield Close into Moyle Park

· exchange 1619m² of reserve land known as Mayflower Park on Winthrop Way for a new park (1620m²) at another location on Winthrop Way.

3. Kāinga Ora will provide capital investment to develop the new walkway and park.

4. To inform decision-making on whether to support the two land exchange proposals, staff called for objections in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977.

5. Council received one submission in support of the proposed Watchfield Close land exchange. One submission was also received in support of the proposed Mayflower Park land exchange. There were no objections.

6. Staff recommend that the local board support both land exchanges. They are deemed high priority when assessed against council’s policy. Both land exchanges would improve amenity, safety and functionality of these open spaces.

7. With no objections, there is low risk of judicial review of council decision-making processes if it proceeds with the land exchanges.

8. The Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee will consider both land exchange proposals on 10 December 2020.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) recommend that the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee approve the exchange of 101m² of reserve land on Watchfield Close (Lot 36 DP 66356), which is used as a walkway to Moyle Park for a new walkway of 336m² on Watchfield Close (LOT 39 DP 66356)

b) note that Kāinga Ora will provide capital investment to develop the new walkway

c) recommend that the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee approve the exchange of Mayflower Park (1619m² / LOT 167 DP 55383) for a new park (1620m² / lots 134 and 160 DP 55383 and land from adjoining lots)

d) note that Kāinga Ora will provide capital investment up to $290,000 (excluding GST) in development of the new park.

Horopaki

Context

There are opportunities to improve open space in Māngere

9. Kāinga Ora is redeveloping its housing in Māngere East and West.

10. Staff identified opportunity to enhance open space provision with:

· an exchange of 101m² of reserve land on Watchfield Close, currently a walkway to Moyle Park, for a new walkway of 336m² on Watchfield Close

· an exchange of Mayflower Park (1619m²) for a new park (1620m²) on Winthrop Way.

11. The proposed land exchange areas and indicative designs are provided in Attachment A.

12. Kāinga Ora will provide capital investment to develop the new walkway. It will also invest a maximum of $290,000 (excluding GST) to develop the new park.

13. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board and Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee approved both land exchanges for public notification in May (MO/2020/43) and June (PAC/2020/19).

There were no objections following the public notification process

14. Staff publicly notified the proposed land exchanges in accordance with section 15 of the Reserves Act 1977.

15. The consultation period ran for five weeks between 7 September and 11 October 2020.

16. A total of two submissions were received during that period:

· one submission was in support of the proposed Watchfield Close land exchange

· one submission was in support of the proposed Mayflower Park land exchange.

17. Staff also contacted 11 iwi identified as having association with Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park on 9 September and 1 October 2020.

18. None of the contacted iwi objected and nine did not respond.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Staff recommend the exchange of land at Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park

19. Section 15 of the Reserves Act 1977 requires council to consider the objections to any reserve land exchange.

20. There were no objections to the two proposed land exchanges.

21. Staff recommend that the local board support the proposed land exchanges as they are deemed to be a high priority when assessed against council policy.

22. Table 1 and Table 2 provide a summary of the assessments against the Parks and Open Space Acquisition Policy 2013.

Table 1 – Assessment of the Watchfield Close proposed land exchange

Watchfield Close walkway	Acquisition criteria	Comment	Rating
	Meeting community needs, now and in the future	High priority as the proposed land exchange would increase the accessibility and capacity of a reserve that serves an area of high growth	High priority
	Connecting parks and open spaces	Not priority as it will not connect existing open spaces
	Protecting and restoring Auckland’s unique features and meanings	Not a priority as there are no known heritage, cultural or natural values of significance located within the areas proposed for exchange
	Improving the parks and open spaces we already have	High priority as the proposed land exchange will improve the accessibility and functionality of existing open space
	The land exchange would: · improve access into Moyle Park · increase amenity values and open space (235m²) · provide a safer, more visible walkway.

Watchfield Close land exchange is deemed a high priority

23. Staff recommend that the local board support the proposed exchange of the existing walkway on Watchfield Close (Lot 36 DP 66356), for a new walkway of 336m² also on Watchfield Close (LOT 39 DP 66356). It is a high priority when assessed against council policy.

24. The proposed land exchange is expected to have positive benefits to the community, including improved access into Moyle Park and increased amenity values.

25. It would also deliver increase in open space (235m²) as well as a safer, more visible walkway for current and future residents and the wider community.

Table 2 – Assessment for the Mayflower Park proposed land exchange

Mayflower Park	Acquisition criteria	Comment	Rating
	Meeting community needs, now and in the future	High priority as the proposed land exchange would increase the accessibility of the park that serves an area of high growth	High priority
	Connecting parks and open spaces	Not priority as it will not connect existing open spaces
	Protecting and restoring Auckland’s unique features and meanings	Not a priority as there are no known heritage, cultural or natural values of significance located within the areas proposed for exchange
	Improving the parks and open spaces we already have	High priority as the proposed land exchange will improve the accessibility and functionality of existing open space
	The land exchange would: · increase accessibility with additional road frontages · enhance amenity value and functionality · improve sightlines into the new park · provide environmental design for safer, more visible space.

Mayflower Park land exchange is deemed a high priority

26. Staff recommend that the local board support the proposed exchange of Mayflower Park (1619m² / Lot 167 DP 55383) on Winthrop Way for a new park (1620m² / lots 134 and 160 DP 55383 and land from adjoining lots) also on Winthrop Way.

27. The land exchange would result in a 1m² increase in council land.

28. Accessibility will be markedly increased with road frontages on three sides. Development of the park by Kāinga Ora will improve amenity values and functionality.

29. The other benefits of the proposed land exchange are improved access and sightlines into the new reserve. Crime prevention through environmental design will create a safer, more visible space for the enjoyment of current and future residents and the wider community

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30. Climate change is expected to bring increasing temperatures, rising sea levels and changing rainfall patterns. Park and walkway development proposals should reflect these effects and take into consideration the environmentally sensitive ways to manage open space to achieve their benefits, such as conserving water resources.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. Once the land exchanges have been completed, Customer and Community Services will be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of the site.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. A total of two submissions were received during the public notification period. There were no objections.

33. Council and Kāinga Ora staff held a workshop with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on 12 February 2020. The purpose of the workshop was to present information on the proposals and to respond to any questions and concerns.

34. On 18 March 2020 a report proposing acquisition of land and public notification of the land exchanges was considered by the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. The board deferred the report to their April 2020 business meeting due to concerns with the land acquisition next to Tararata Stream (MO/2020/30).

35. The April 2020 business meeting was delayed due to the Covid-19 outbreak.

36. On 6 May 2020, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board supported the public notification of the two proposed land exchanges at Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park (MO/2020/43).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. The following iwi were contacted as part of the engagement process:

· Waikato-Tainui

· Ngāti Whanaunga

· Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Ngāti Maru

· Ngāti Tamaoho

· Ngāti Tamaterā

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Te Ata

· Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei

· Te Ahiwaru- Waiohua

38. There were no objections and nine iwi did not respond to the 9 September or 1 October 2020 emailed letters.

39. The proposed land exchanges do not contain any known sites or places of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. Should the Local Board support the proposed exchanges of council-owned open space for comparable Kāinga Ora land, there are no additional associated costs to council.

41. Kāinga Ora have agreed to invest in the redevelopment of the two new sites.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. There is a low legal risk to council as the land exchange process has been managed in accordance with section 15 of the Reserves Act 1977.

43. With no objections, there is low risk of judicial review of council decision-making processes if the council proceeds with the land exchange.

44. Kāinga Ora will manage any risks associated with their redevelopment projects in Māngere East and West.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. The Parks, Arts, Community and Events committee will consider the two land exchange proposals on 10 December 2020.

46. Kāinga Ora will return to the local board seeking feedback on designs for the walkway and park if the land exchange proposals are approved.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Watchfield Close and Mayflower Park proposed exchange areas and indicative designs	55

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Maclean Grindell - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Marriott-Lloyd - Senior Policy Manager

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

Outline of the landowner approval process and grant of landowner approval for a wastewater connection through John McAnulty Reserve, Ōtāhuhu

File No.: CP2020/16573

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To request landowner approval for a wastewater connection to the public network within John McAnulty Reserve for the proposed adjoining development into nine lots, at 132 Church Street Ōtāhuhu.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Land Advisory Services are the team within Auckland Council who undertake a thorough review and assessment of landowner applications, which involves consulting with internal specialists across council and seeking support or approval from local boards.

3. Land Advisory Services have received a landowner application from Kamal Matta, the applicant, who is proposing to develop the site located at 132 Church Street, Ōtāhuhu into nine residential lots. To achieve this increase in residential housing, a wastewater manhole and pipe connection to the east of the property, to the nearest public wastewater network, is required.

4. John McAnulty Reserve is situated at 93 Hutton Street, Ōtāhuhu and is legally described as Lot 3 DP 92360. The reserve is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve, pursuant to section 16(11) subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

5. Staff recommend that the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board grant landowner approval to the applicant, Kamal Matta, to enable the wastewater manhole and pipe connection to proceed within John McAnulty Reserve. This will support the development at 132 Church Street, Ōtāhuhu by future proofing the site with adequate infrastructure to cater for the increased residential housing and use.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) grant landowner approval to Kamal Matta to construct a wastewater manhole and pipe connection within John McAnulty Reserve, situated at 93 Hutton Street, Ōtāhuhu and legally described as Lot 3 DP 92360 to support the applicant’s residential development at 132 Church Street, Ōtāhuhu.

Horopaki

Context

6. This report outlines the landowner approval process for any work within local reserves or parks.

7. This report considers the landowner application for a manhole and additional wastewater pipe connection to the public network within John McAnulty Reserve.

8. The reserve is zoned as Informal Recreation Zone in the Auckland Unitary Plan: Operative in Part. The site is not identified as a significant ecological area or closed landfill. There are no historic heritage overlays or places of significance or value listed on geomaps for this reserve.

9. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board are the decision makers for any work or activities within John McAnulty Reserve.

Landowner approval process

10. Landowner approval applications are received by the land advisory team who assess each application received.

11. The process is outlined in Attachment A. In summary it involves the following:

· a land status check if the parcel is land held in fee simple by Auckland Council but subject to the Reserves Act 1977 or a local park under the Local Government Act 2002

· an assessment of the application against Geomaps layers including development restrictions, overlays, natural resources, heritage, infrastructure, mana whenua overlays, built environment and infrastructure

· the application is then reviewed and feedback requested from relevant internal specialists depending on the type of application:

o for example, if the proposal is for stormwater infrastructure, the application is reviewed by the healthy waters team, or if any trees are proposed to be affected an arborist report is requested from the applicant and then reviewed by the senior urban forest specialist

· other specialists consulted may include facilities managers, geotechnical specialists, legal specialists, ecologists, landscape architects, asset information advisors, parks and places specialists and local board advisors

· the application and feedback is then summarised by the land use advisor and the application details are forwarded to the local board delegated elected member on behalf of the applicant for review and feedback

· the local board as the decision makers then have two options:

o to provide feedback via an email, with the manager of land advisory services then having the delegated authority to approve or decline the application, or

o to request a report, which is presented at a formal business meeting and the local board decline or approve the application

· the applicant is then issued a formal landowner letter informing them of the decision and including relevant conditions, such as, but not limited to:

o health and safety conditions

o ensuring the applicant controls rubbish at the site

o safety requirements such as a spotter during certain activities

o on-going maintenance depending on the proposal, for example for planting

o reinstatement of land.

Application details

12. John McAnulty Reserve is situated at 93 Hutton Street, Ōtāhuhu and legally described as Lot 3 DP 92360. The reserve is held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve, pursuant to section 16 (11) subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

13. The applicant has proposed a wastewater pipe to be installed by directional drilling (underground trenching) from the south-eastern corner of 132 Church Street, Ōtāhuhu towards the existing wastewater pipe in John McAnulty Reserve to service the proposed nine lot development. This application has been reviewed and approved by Auckland Council Regulatory Engineering South as indicated in Attachment B.

14. There are large trees in this reserve near the proposed wastewater infrastructure. The applicant provided an arborist report which was reviewed by council’s senior urban forest specialist. The work does not contribute to any significant alteration to the trees. The applicant will be forming a temporary vehicle access for construction of the wastewater pipe.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. The options for the local board are to approve or decline the landowner request for the wastewater connection to the public network within John McAnulty Reserve.

16. There is no alternative option for a wastewater connection due to site contours as wastewater needs to track downhill to meet engineering requirements.

17. The advantages of approving the landowner application are that:

· the wastewater manhole and pipe connection are essential infrastructure to service the additional nine housing lots for the local community and this will future proof the public wastewater network

· this proposal maximises the use of the land in a built-up area and may provide housing close to work for local residents

· there will be minor effects during construction but on completion the pipe will be underground so no visual effects will result apart from the additional manhole that will be installed flush with the ground for maintenance purposes and to ensure there is no trip hazard

· safety fencing will be established prior to the works and will remain in place while works are expected to progress.

18. If the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board declines the landowner application the development will not be able to provide adequate infrastructure to service the proposed nine new lots and will not be able to proceed. This option is not recommended by staff.

Land use and specialists’ comments/consultation

19. Auckland Council’s facilities coordinator, parks and places specialist and senior urban forest specialist have reviewed the proposal and are in support of the the landowner approval for the manhole and wastewater pipe connection to the public network to proceed with specific conditions.

20. The senior urban forest specialist requested access to the location to be formed by installation of a temporary ramp from the private property to the reserve. Access through Hutton Street or Fairburn Road was ruled out due to the existing trees and retaining walls.

21. The work near the existing trees roots is at a depth where tree roots are unlikely to be affected. All work near the trees will be carried out under the supervision of the consultant arborist and must comply with accepted arboriculture standards. The ground must be reinstated and this will be a condition added to the formal landowner letter if approved by the local board.

Recommendation

22. The recommendation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is to support the wastewater connection to the public network to enable the landowner to proceed with the development of the adjacent site. This will increase the much needed housing supply for Auckland.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. The proposal does not introduce any new source of emissions at the site. The wastewater will be treated at the Mangere Wastewater Treatment Plant and therefore, has no impact on greenhouse gas emissions at John McAnulty Reserve.

24. The site is identified as a flood prone area but as the wastewater pipe is placed underground and connected to the public network the change will not have any long term impacts on the land or on climate change.

25. The manhole must be installed so that the hinged lid faces in the direction of the overland flow path and the hinged side is on the upper side of the flow path. This reduces the risk of the manhole cover opening and creating a fall hazard during any increased storm events.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The landowner approval application has no identified impact 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

27. The local board has reviewed the wastewater application via an email and skype workshop meeting. The local board requested the application to be presented to a formal business meeting for a decision.

28. The recommendations in this report are within local board’s allocated authority to grant landowner approvals within local community reserves.

Planning Context

29. The recommendations within this report support the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2017 outcome of:

· “Protecting our natural environment and heritage” by providing stringent conditions and overview of the work near trees.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30. 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.

31. This proposal seeks to increase housing for all Aucklanders including Māori living in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

32. There are no sites of value or significance to mana whenua identified in the Auckland Unitary Plan – Operative in Part in relation to the application.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33. There are no financial operational implications for the local board over and above the existing maintenance requirements of this land.

34. The wastewater manhole and pipe construction must meet the specifications in accordance with the standards as identified in the Auckland Code of Practice.

35. On completion of the construction the financial operational implications for the additional wastewater manhole and pipe are the full responsibility of Watercare Services Limited. This is formalised with an Agreement to Grant an Easement between Auckland Council, the applicant and Watercare Services Limited.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. Risk type	Risk	Mitigation
Tree protection	There could be damage to trees and/or tree roots during construction.	A suitably qualified and experienced council approved arborist (work arborist) must be engaged by the consent holder at the start of the project to supervise all work in the vicinity of the trees. The appointed work arborist must be experienced in tree protection systems and construction methodologies and will need to be able to coordinate site works ensuring that the tree protection methodology is correctly implemented. Any work within the drip line of the trees in John McAnulty Reserve or any vegetation other than grass must be thrust bored (directionally drilled, which is underground drilling), rather than using an open trench method (above ground level method) to avoid tree root zones. No storage of materials, leaching of chemicals, tracking of any machinery, stockpiling of spoil, trenching or alteration of soil grade or other contamination shall occur (unless under the arborist guidance), within the rootzone of any reserve trees or vegetation. Care shall be taken to prevent any over-head-strike damage caused by machinery and to also generally protect any surrounding reserve vegetation during the project operations.
Physical access	There could be damage to trees or roots from the excavator and/or transporter carrying the manhole.	A ramp is proposed to avoid damage to trees and tree roots. Depending on the nature of the loading of the machinery or vehicle, it may be necessary to cover adjacent areas with a protective overlay sufficient to protect the ground from being muddied, compacted, churned up or otherwise disturbed; for example, “Track Mats”, or a layer of mulch or sand/SAP7 overlaid if necessary with a raft of wire planks, plywood or similar). The applicant can only proceed during a dry spell.
Setting a precedent	There is a risk that an approval would set a precedent for any future applications for wastewater infrastructure into reserves from adjoining properties, that these must also be approved.	Any future applications will be put to the same rigorous assessment and reviewed on a case by case basis by the relevant specialists.
Reinstatement obligations	The surrounding grass reinstatement or clearing of rubbish may not be completed by the applicant.	A condition in the formal landowner approval letter includes the requirements that the applicant must undertake full reinstatement of any damage to the park surface or its assets to original or better condition. Any damage done to the park environment and not reinstated within 20 days of the works being carried out will result in council’s contractor carrying out any reinstatement work necessary. The applicant will be invoiced for all expenses, including any staff time in reinstating the park area. The applicant must leave the park and all its existing assets tidy and clear of stones, rubbish, debris, building materials and excess soil.
Health and safety	The manhole covers may lift during overland flow or extreme storm events and cause a health and safety trip hazard.	The manhole must be installed so that the hinged lid faces in the direction of the overland flow path, and, the hinged side is on the upper side of the flow path. This reduces the risk of the manhole cover opening and creating a fall hazard.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. Subject to the local board’s approval, a decision will be communicated to the applicant with a formal landowner approval letter. Conditions will be placed on the landowner application if approved regarding (but not limited to):

· accidental discovery protocols

· sediment control

· health and safety conditions

· ensuring the applicant controls rubbish at the site

· safety requirements such as safety fences and clear signage

· on-going maintenance being the responsibility of Watercare Services Limited as the owner of the asset

· reinstatement of land if affected.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A: Landowner approval process map for applicants	67
b ⇩	Attachment B: 132 Church Street, Ōtāhuhu, Drainage Plan, Sheet numbers: D200 to D204 by MS Planning Limited, dated May 2019	69

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Raewyn Sendles - Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard

File No.: CP2020/16568

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) support the Community Facilities Sustainable Asset Standard as an action of the Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri (Auckland’s Climate Plan)

b) provide any feedback to support the Governing Body’s consideration of the Standard as regional policy.

Horopaki

Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

17. Sixty-one per cent of C40 cities^{^[1]} 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 achieved 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^{^[2]} 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	81

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Toto Vu-Duc - Manager Community Leases

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Manoj Ragupathy – Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 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.: CP2020/16732

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend that the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 as provided in 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, being 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.

21. 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

22. 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).

23. 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

24. 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.

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

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

29. 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

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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	89
b ⇩	The Specified Development Project process	91

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

18 November 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/16734

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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.^{^[3]}

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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.^{^[4]}

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.^{^[5]}

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.^{^[6]} The plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017.^{^[7]}

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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu 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

Authors

Tony Reidy – Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

[1] 2014 C40 Green Building City Market Briefs Compendium. C40 is a global network of leadership cities taking action to address climate change. Auckland is a member of this network.

[2] A 4.44 per cent premium was applied to those projects meeting certification thresholds for delivery between 2021-2029. This percentage was based on findings from a 2005 study by the Ministry for the Environment which found sustainable building features to cost an average of two to six per cent more than capital costs for Standard buildings.

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

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

[5] Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Part 1A, clause 36D.

[7] Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017, Independent Māori Statutory Board

Chairperson	Lemauga Lydia Sosene
Deputy Chairperson	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Members	Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich
	Makalita Kolo
	Christine O'Brien
	Harry Fatu Toleafoa