Agenda of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 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 Big Street Bikers 5

8.2 Anglican Trust for Women and Children (ATWC) 6

8.3 Belong Aotearoa 6

9 Public Forum 6

10 Extraordinary Business 7

11 Governing Body Member's Update 9

12 Chairperson's Report 11

13 Board Member's Reports 19

14 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 21

15 Local board views on Plan Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct 31

16 Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard 37

17 Allocation of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Parking Reserve Funds to Ian Shaw Reserve Carpark 45

18 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 grant allocations 51

19 Innovating Streets - Local Board Governance Agreement with Auckland Transport 61

20 Auckland Transport Update November 2020 71

21 Governance Forward Work Calendar 77

22 Record of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Workshops 81

23 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

24 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 87

C1 Proposed Masterplan Waiapu Precinct Onehunga 87

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

3 Declaration of Interest

Deputy Chairperson D Burrows declared an interest in Item 18: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 grant allocations, LG2111-227, Mafutaga Samoa Tāmaki.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 27 October 2020 and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 10 November 2020, as 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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 Big Street Bikers

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Providing Andrew Charlesworth of Big Street Bikers the opportunity to address the board in relation to the Locky-Dock Network, and how the group can work with the local board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Andrew Charlesworth.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) thank Andrew Charlesworth for his attendance.

Attachments

a Big Street Bikers - Locky-Dock Network........................................................ 91

8.2 Anglican Trust for Women and Children (ATWC)

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Providing Amanda Colares of Anglican Trust for Women and Children (ATWC) the opportunity to present their Home Interaction Programme for Parents and Youngsters (HIPPY) programme to the board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Amanda Colares.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) thank Amanda Colares for her attendance.

8.3 Belong Aotearoa

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Providing Rochana Sheward of Belong Aotearoa the opportunity to address the board in relation to the work they’re currently doing the local board area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. As per standing orders the Chairperson has approved the deputation request from Rochana Sheward.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) thank Rochana Sheward for her 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.

At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.

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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Chair Chris Makoare Monthly Update November 2020	13

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 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.: CP2020/16009

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board representative as required, on any Political Working Group established (in accordance with the Planning Committee’s resolution PLA/2020/79 on 1 October 2020), to give political direction on the execution of the council’s powers under the Urban Development Act 2020.

Horopaki

Context

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

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

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

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

· Unitec Residential Development

· Papakainga development in Point Chevalier

· Britomart Station Eastern End Upgrade

· Papakura to Pukekohe Rail Electrification

· Northern Pathway – Westhaven to Akoranga shared pathway

· Papakura to Drury South State Highway 1 Improvements.

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

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

· the public good aspects of the application

· its potential contribution to job creation and economic activity

· the potential significance of any environmental effects

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

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

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

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

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

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

Urban Development Act 2020

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

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

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

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

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

Urban Development Act 2020

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of Powers available to Kāinga Ora	27
b ⇩	The Specified Development Project process	29

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Helgard Wagener, Acting Policy and Planning Manager, Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/17134

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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.^{^[1]}

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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 and deputy chairperson of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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.^{^[2]}

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.^{^[3]}

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 Tāmaki.

33. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei had no concerns with the proposed changes and did not need to engage further. Ngai Tai ki Tāmaki 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.^{^[4]} The plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017.^{^[5]}

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard

File No.: CP2020/17135

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 Maungakiekie-Tāmaki 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, below.

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^{^[6]} 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 Māori

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^{^[7]} 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	43

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Toto Vu-Duc – Energy, Efficiency & Sustainability Specialist, Community Facilities

Authorisers

Manoj Ragupathy – Acting GM, Local Board Services

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

Allocation of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Parking Reserve Funds to Ian Shaw Reserve Carpark

File No.: CP2020/17358

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek the local board’s support to request that Finance and Performance Committee release the local board asset-based services Parking Reserve Fund to increase the provision of car parking at Ian Shaw Reserve.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Ian Shaw Reserve car park meets the requirements for the Parking Reserve Fund.

3. The Parking Reserve Fund is governed by the Finance and Performance Committee; therefore, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board would need to apply to the Finance and Performance Committee to approve the release of the reserve funding.

4. The former Auckland City Council collected $519,512 in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area under the contributions policy for the provision of off-street parking. These funds were collected via cash contributions from developers in lieu of parking provisions, for council to utilise for off-street parking as the opportunity arose.

5. Auckland Council inherited Ian Shaw Reserve at the time of amalgamation. The reserve’s car park is currently on the local board’s financial year 2019/2020 work programme to be renewed. Following workshops with the local board and discussions with the community leaseholders, additional parking is required at this site.

6. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board approved the Community Facilities work programme 2020-2023 in August 2020 (resolution MT/2020/114).

7. As approved projects progress through the delivery phases, the activity description and approved budget source or budget allocation may require minor or significant variations in order to achieve the expected outcome.

8. Community Facilities staff have identified that the project to renew the carpark at Ian Shaw Reserve (SharePoint ID 3121) requires significant variation to better reflect the proposed physical works and approved budget allocated for delivery.

9. The current balance of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Parking Reserve Fund is $519,512. It is proposed that $340,000 of the Parking Reserve Fund be released in the 2020/2021 financial year, as a funding contribution to the Ian Shaw Reserve carpark upgrade.

10. Staff recommend that the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board support the submission to the Finance and Performance Committee to approve the contribution of the Maungakiekie-Tamaki’s Parking Reserve Fund to increase the level of service at Ian Shaw Reserve by improving their carparking provision on site.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) request that the Finance and Performance Committee release $340,0000 from the local board asset-based services Parking Reserve Fund to increase the provision of car parking at Ian Shaw Reserve.

Horopaki

Context

11. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board have $519,512 available budget in their Parking Reserve Fund which is held by council.

12. The former Auckland City Council collected $519,512 in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area, under the contributions policy, for the provision of off-street parking. These funds were collected via cash contributions from developers in lieu of parking provisions, for council to utilise for off-street parking as the opportunity arose.

13. Auckland Council inherited Ian Shaw Reserve at the time of amalgamation. The reserve’s car park is currently on the local boards 19/20 work programme to be renewed. Following workshops with the local board and discussions with the community leaseholders, additional parking is required at this site.

14. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board approved the Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew three-year work programme for delivery over financial years 2020-2023 (MT/2020/114). Included in this approved work programme is the project, Ian Shaw Reserve – renew carpark (SharePoint ID 3121).

15. The Parking Reserve Fund is governed by the Finance and Performance Committee; therefore, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board would need to request the Finance and Performance Committee to approve the release of the reserve funding.

16. The delivery of the Ian Shaw Reserve carpark renewal commenced in financial year 2019/2020. Extensive investigation undertaken identified the current parking facilities to be insufficient to provide for the needs of the community and user groups.

17. The scope of the project has evolved from a ‘like for like’ renewal to an upgrade of the parking infrastructure to address the provision shortfall, current safety concerns and accessibility of the parking areas.

18. The increased scope of the project aligns with the Parking Reserve Funding criteria, to increase the level of service at the reserve and the provision of off-street parking in the same area.

As approved in the 2020/2021 Community Facilities Work Programme (MT/2020/144)

SharePoint ID	Activity Name	Financial Year	Budget Source	Budget
3121	Ian Shaw Reserve –	2019/2020	Local Renewals	$26,517
	renew carpark	2020/2021	Local Renewals	$340,000
		2021/2022	Local Renewals	$167,000
Total				$533,517

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. Approval is sought to allocate $340,000 from the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Parking Reserve Fund (total $519,512) to meet the budget requirements for the increase in car parking provision at Ian Shaw Reserve. This will reduce the on-street parking demand in the immediate area and ensure the safety concerns at Ian Shaw Reserve are addressed by the installation of additional lighting in areas that have high pedestrian traffic.

20. It is recommended that the upgrade of the existing parking area employs a long-term solution to cater for the ever-growing demand for on-street parking in the immediate area. This is illustrated in the concept plan for Ian Shaw Reserve (Attachment A):

i) providing a sealed carpark within the green space

ii) further restricting vehicle access to the waterfront

iii) widening the existing accessway

iv) sealing the existing gravel adjacent to the accessway to create a formal parking area

v) constructing a new roundabout outside the Waka Ama Club

vi) installing new bollards to restrict informal parking.

21. The new facilities proposed will improve the overall safety, usability, operation and the aesthetic of this highly utilised park and recreation space.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22. The council’s climate goals, as set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan are:

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

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

23. The budget variations identified in this report have no direct effect on climate change. Each project will be considered individually to assess the impacts of climate change, adaptation and the approach to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. Staff from council’s Parks and Places and Community Facilities - Operational Management and Maintenance have been consulted and are supportive of the project outcomes.

25. Existing community leaseholders have also been consulted throughout the investigation and design stages of the project and support the proposed outcomes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. The issues identified during the investigation and design stage of the project have been reported to the local board on 3 April 2020. Local board members indicated support for the design and approved the project to progress to achieve the proposed outcomes and increase the level of service at the site.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader obligations to Māori.

28. The projects discussed in this report will benefit Māori and the wider community through the provision of quality facilities and open spaces that promote good health, the fostering of family and community relationships and connection to the natural environment.

29. Engagement with Nga Hau Maiangi has been undertaken to consult on the proposed project outcomes to ensure the service requirements for the Waka Ama activities were considered throughout the design phase.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. If the Parking Reserve Fund is approved by the Finance and Performance Committee, $340,000 of the local board’s Asset Based Service (ABS) : Renewals budget will become available for reallocation.

31. If approved, staff will provide advice to the local board and seek a further decision at the appropriate business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. There are no risks identified. Contingency for physical work is calculated as a part of the engineers estimate for each of the projects identified herein.

33. Discussions with the community leaseholders and local iwi will continue to be undertaken ahead of formal commencement of the physical works.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. A report requesting to release the Parking Reserve Fund for the Ian Shaw Reserve car park will go to the next available Finance and Performance Committee meeting

35. Subject to approval of the recommendations proposed, a report requesting the Parking Reserve Fund to be released for the Ian Shaw Reserve car park will go to the Finance and Performance Committees next meeting.

36. Dependant on the fund being approved by Finance and Performance Committee, the delivery of the Ian Shaw Reserve car park, will be progressed to completion, and staff will seek a further decision from the board to reallocate the ABS: renewals budget that is no longer needed to deliver the car park.

37. The local board will be updated each month on the progress of the delivery for their approved 2020/2021 Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew work programme.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ian Shaw Reserve Concept Plan	49

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Angie Bennett - Work Programme Lead, Community Facilities

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager, Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 grant allocations

File No.: CP2020/16717

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report presents applications received in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 (Attachment B).

3. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board adopted the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 28 April 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

4. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $120,000 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $41,908.46 was allocated in the previous grant round. This leaves a total of $78,091.54 to be allocated to two local grants rounds.

5. Sixteen applications were received for Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021, requesting a total of $105,232.40.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application received in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021, listed in Table One.

Table One: Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG2111-206	Dolphin Theatre Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the royalty fees, advertising, printing (including purchase of a printer), and electricity costs for a theatre production.	$4,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-212	Panmure Business Association Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the cost of removing a mural and repainting the wall.	$3,100.00	Eligible
LG2111-219	Melino Moe Ofa Under the umbrella of:The Synergy Projects Trust	Arts and culture	Towards facilitation and equipment costs including the purchase of a sewing machine and raw materials for delivering the "Tongan Traditional Handicrafts" workshop at the Oranga Community Centre.	$5,254.00	Eligible
LG2111-201	Glen Innes Chinese Groups Incorporated	Community	Towards venue hire, purchase of a projector and sound system, purchase and delivery charges for costumes from China, bus hire, stationery, and administration costs for the Christmas event, Chinese New Year celebration, and the Chinese traditional dragon boat event.	$6,921.00	Eligible
LG2111-203	Flipping East - Foundation for Youth Wellbeing under the umbrella of: No Six Limited	Community	Towards the cost of delivering the "Flipping East Youth Wellbeing Project", specifically the cost of staffing, venue, catering, uniform, marketing, resources, purchase of sound equipment and gear including a studio microphone acoustic screen, studio monitor, key performance pad, musical keyboard, acoustic foam sheets, and the revamping and upkeeping of the Flipping East headquarters.	$8,276.05	Eligible
LG2111-208	Onehunga Toy Library	Community	Towards the expansion of the toy library inventory through the purchase of new toys.	$1,106.68	Eligible
LG2111-211	Life Education Trust Counties Manukau	Community	Towards the overall costs to deliver a health and well-being programme to Onehunga Primary School.	$6,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-213	The Tongan Health Society Incorporated	Community	Towards delivery of the “Pacific Elderly Day Programme”, including costs for speakers, instructors, transportation (pick up and drop off), consumables, resources for activities, advertising, and catering.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-215	Tamaki Community Development Trust	Community	Towards a play-based therapy programme for primary school children, including the purchase of playsets, afternoon tea, prizes, facilitators' salaries and mileage costs.	$7,335.39	Eligible
LG2111-217	Ha'ape Mata Mei Langi o Glen Innes	Community	Towards the purchase of 30 planter boxes and 30 ten litre compost bags.	$1,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-221	Navigate Seniors Under the umbrella of: The Synergy Projects Trust	Community	Towards the cost of printed materials, administration, catering, venue hire, and facilitation for running the "Navigate Seniors" programme.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-224	Pro-Pare Athlete Management Trust	Community	Towards the cost of running a summer tutoring programme for at-risk Pacifica and Maori youth aged between 16 to 18, specifically the cost of petrol and catering.	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-225	YMCA North Incorporated	Community	Towards the "Raise Up" Maungakiekie-Tāmaki programme and event costs between January to May 2021 including meeting, uniform, training, marketing, materials, transport, mileage, gifts, and prizes costs.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-226	International Kiwi Consultants Limited	Community	Towards the cost of building a free centralised digital hub for Mt Wellington locals and communities including the cost of community site management, website development, resources to build content, and maintenance of the digital hub.	$10,000.00	Eligible
LG2111-227	Mafutaga Samoa Tamaki Under the umbrella of: ASA Foundation Trust	Community	Towards the purchase of 35 pairs of walking shoes, a speaker set, 35 training jackets, and t-shirts for the Mafutaga Samoa Tamaki Healthy and Safer Community” programme.	$9,239.28	Eligible
LG2111-222	Community Cat Coalition Incorporated	Environment	Towards veterinary costs to de-sex and microchip cats	$10,000.00	Eligible
Total				$105,232.40

Horopaki

Context

6. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

7. Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

8. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

9. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board adopted the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 28 April 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. Due to the current COVID-19 crisis, staff have also assessed each application according to which alert level the proposed activity is able to proceed, under alert level two only 10 people are able to gather. Events and activities have been assessed according to this criterion.

12. The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

1. The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by local residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. Examples of projects include:

· local food production and food waste reduction

· decreasing use of single-occupancy transport options

· home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

· local tree planting and streamside revegetation

· education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

13. Based on the main focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice. The main focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage.

14. The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

15. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications in accordance with its priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

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

17. A summary of each application received through Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 (Attachment B) is provided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

18. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Maori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Maori. Auckland Council’s Maori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

19. Eight applicants applying to Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two indicate projects that target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

21. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $120,000 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $41,908.46 was allocated in the previous grant round. This leaves a total of $78,091.54 to be allocated to two local grants.

22. Sixteen applications were received for Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021, requesting a total of $105,232.40.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25. Following the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board allocation of funding for the local grants round two, the grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board Grants Programme 2020-2021	57
b ⇨	Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Moumita Dutta - Senior Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

Innovating Streets - Local Board Governance Agreement with Auckland Transport

File No.: CP2020/17008

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To establish a Governance Agreement between Auckland Transport and the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board for the local board’s Innovating Streets project - Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Traffic Areas.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Innovating Streets is a national fund that helps local authorities to create more people-friendly spaces in towns and cities. A project identified by the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board has been chosen tor funding, the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Areas Project.

3. This report formalizes the relationship between Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board and Auckland Transport allowing both to work together to deliver the project.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) approve the Governance Agreement with Auckland Transport for the local boards Innovating Streets project - Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Traffic Areas

b) delegate member(s) the authority to operate as the local board’s representative on the project management team, with the authority to:

i) make day-to-day operational decisions related to delivery of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Areas project.

ii) authorize financial variations of up to 5% of the total budget without reference to the board, provided that these do not increase the overall budget for the project.

iii) speak to the media or to sign off media releases on behalf of the board about the project.

c) stipulate that over-spends greater than 5% of the total project budget are mandated by resolution of the full board.

Horopaki

Context

4. The Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board was established under Section 10 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and is responsible for enabling democratic decision making by, and on behalf of, communities within the local board area and is delegated to lead Auckland Council’s place-making role in the board’s boundaries.

5. The local board initiated a successful application, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Areas for funding by Waka Kotahi – The New Zealand Transport Agency.

6. Auckland Transport was established under Section 38 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Act 2010 and is responsible for contributing to an effective and efficient land transport system to support Auckland's social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being, it manages transport related matters in the region. Auckland Transport is also the road controlling authority for Auckland.

7. The Innovating Streets Fund is a Waka Kotahi, New Zealand Transport Agency fund to develop tactical urbanism techniques such as pilots, pop-ups and interim treatments that make it faster and easier to transition our streets to safer and more liveable spaces.

8. Waka Kotahi provides 90% of funding for eligible projects. Legally, local boards cannot receive this funding or deliver transport projects, so Auckland Transport is required to act as the delivery agency for the local board.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. Auckland Transport is Auckland Council’s delivery agency for all transport related projects and is therefore the approved organisation for the purpose of applying for, and receiving funds from the National Land Transport Fund through which Innovating Streets Pilot Fund projects are funded.

10. Within this local board area this will mean an investment of approximately $580,000 between now and June 2021.

11. Auckland is the only local authority in New Zealand with a separate Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) for Transport. In other councils local elected members have a direct governance relationship with the people delivering transport projects. This unique situation means that local board led projects, like this Innovating Streets project, require agreed decision-making accountability and defined roles and responsibilities.

12. Auckland Transport has therefore developed a draft Governance Agreement that is included as Attachment A.

13. The project and the requirement for a clear governace structure have been discussed with representatives of the local board and the document was discussed with the whole local board on the following occasions:

a) the implications of the Innovating Streets Fund, including the need to establish a governance structure were discussed with the local board a workshop on 12 October 2020;

b) the project was discussed again at a workshop on 3 November 2020.

14. The Governance Agreement is standard for all local boards, however Auckland Transport is willing to negotiate on aspects of the agreement, specifically those relating to how the board wishes to exercise its leadership role, for instance:

a) delegating to one local board member as the board’s representative to act on behalf of the whole board;

b) degree of decision-making flexibility that is delegated to the local board representative - Auckland Transport recommends that the board allow their representative a delegation to authorise variations of up to 5% of the projects planned cost. This means the delegate could authorise variations totalling $29,000 without reference to the board. This would be within the project’s planned value ie. the delegate cannot spend more than the overall project budget of $580,000;

c) regular reporting back to the board as the project progresses - when and in what detail does the board want to have information provided about the project;

d) the board’s approach to dealing with media enquiries and project communications - Auckland Transport will assist with preparing material but the local board needs a mechanism for approving what is said on its behalf.

15. The overall aim is to empower the local board to lead the project, working directly with the delivery team. This is a new way of working and Auckland Transport acknowledges that both parties will need to be flexible, and the governance agreement is designed to formalise a relationship that protects the board’s interests by defining both parties’ roles and responsibilities.

16. However, to commit to this programme and deliver the $580,000 worth of work on the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Low Traffic Areas, Auckland Transport does require a formal commitment from the local board to a partnership arrangement of this type.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

18. Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network. Supporting this project contributes directly to these goals by making walking a more attractive option for residents of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. Auckland Transport is working with Auckland Council to help identify Innovating Streets projects.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. Auckland Transport did not invite community feedback because the scope of some projects will only be defined after analysis is finished and community consultation is included in the detailed design process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. Study of the options indicates that none of which involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, so iwi consultation is not required at this time. Projects that continue will be reviewed again and if required iwi will be consulted and any concerns or suggestions considered in planning. Although no specific impacts on Māori were identified. Auckland Transport is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori. Our Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22. The key financial implications of this decision are that Auckland Transport is able to start delivery of the $580,000 worth of work in Maungakiekie-Tāmaki.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. This decision is not without risk. The risks and their mitigations are summarised as follows:

a) the project requires regular interaction that would be impractical for the whole of the board to be involved in, instead the request is that the board delegates a local board member and provides them with authority to manage variations in cost. This means that one Member will have considerable influence on the project and Auckland Transport suggests mitigating this risk by setting a financial limit (i.e. 5% of the total planned cost) and by ensuring that the Member is required to report regularly;

b) the decision starts a project that is planned to cost $580,000. Project costs often escalate and the agreement states that the local board will carry any budget overrun. The suggested mitigation for this risk is regular reporting and escalation of significant financial decisions (ie. variations that have accumulative value of 10% of the planned cost) to the full board for review and decision;

c) the project requires considerable interaction with the community and includes the risk of local residents not agreeing with the ideas. This risk is partly mitigated by the temporary nature of the interventions (i.e. the traffic management tools can be removed) however, Auckland Transport’s best approach to mitigate this risk is to encourage the involvement of board members in leadership roles helping the community discuss and understand the project;

d) Innovating Streets has a tight timeline and the projects must be delivered by June 2021. It is vital the local board responds quickly and flexibly to requests made by the delivery agency.

24. In summary the project has a number of risks, but Auckland Transport believes that by working closely together they can be mitigated.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25. If the local board accepts Auckland Transport’s advice and supports the recommendations then the project team will be formed with the board’s representative in a leadership position and work will start.

26. In accordance with the agreement Auckland Transport’s project team will report monthly on progress and highlight any risks or decisions that are required.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Innovating Streets Draft Governance Agreement	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy – Elected Member Relationship Manager, AT

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon – Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit, AT

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board

24 November 2020

Auckland Transport Update November 2020

File No.: CP2020/17153

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board on Auckland Transport (AT) matters in its area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides an opportunity to highlight Auckland Transport activities in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area and contains information about the following:

a) an update on the AMETI project;

b) general advice on the 2019-2022 Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport November 2020 update report.

Horopaki

Context

3. Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. We report on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in our Local Board Engagement Plan.

4. Monthly reporting acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

5. Auckland Transport is delivering a key strategic project in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area and this is discussed below.

AMETI - Eastern Busway

6. This $1.4 billion project will provide congestion free, bus only lanes for commuters from Botany to Panmure. The AMETI - Eastern Busway is New Zealand’s first urban busway.

7. In September 2020 Auckland Transport discussed the formation of the new AMETI – Eastern Busway Alliance project with local boards, reporting that planning is progressing well on the next stages of the project. During the next few months board members will notice a few changes as the new alliance starts to take shape. Auckland Transport will remain the key agency providing information about Stage 1 (the stretch between Panmure and Pakuranga) however, over time AMETI – Eastern Busway Alliance, as opposed to Auckland Transport, will start to engage with the local board about the remainder of the project.

8. Locally, the labour weekend closures and control of access in and out of Ti Rakau Drive, near the intersection with Pakuranga Road appears to have been completed with minimal disruption or complaints. Recently, the following progress can be reported:

a) Basin View Lane's intersections with Lagoon Drive and Domain Road were reopened;

b) the new entrance to YMCA Lagoon Stadium's opened;

c) 44 Domain Road and the first stages of the busway bridge 'launch', a New Zealand-first for this type of bridge construction;

d) modifications and signalization of the Panmure roundabout is almost finished. See Figure 1 below;

e) the new busway bridge across the Tamaki River has ‘touched down’ on the second pier and is steadily moving towards the north bank. See Figure 2 below.

Figure 1 – New Panmure roundabout from above

Figure 2 – New bus way bridge crossing the Tamaki River

9. On 3 November 2020 the project team met with the local board and provided an update on the AMETI project. Panuku, AT and council are working together to have a formal report for the board’s February 2021 business meeting to provide quality advice for the local board regarding the sign.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

10. The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme. Projects must also:

a) be safe;

b) not impede network efficiency;

c) be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks may be considered if they support a transport outcome).

11. The fund allows local boards to build transport focused local improvements in their areas.

12. Auckland Transport assessed the financial impacts realised from the Emergency Budget 2020/2021 and provided advice to Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board about re-structuring their LBTCF programmes to meet the reduction in funding from the budget.

13. In the new indicative budget, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board’s 2021/2022 LBTCF allocation is $224,712.

14. In September 2020 Auckland Transport attended a workshop with the local board and a progress report was provided about the 2016-2019 LBTCF projects. Advice was provided about best use of the local board’s 2020/2021 LBTCF.

15. At its September business meeting, the local board resolved to allocate its 2020/2021 LBTCF as follows:

a) $ 58,000 to fund the 10% local share requirement for the Innovating Streets project;

b) The remainder ($166,712) to progress the pedestrian improvement located at 89 Tripoli Road.

16. Progress continues on both projects, the local share for the Innovating Streets project is being transferred from Auckland Transport to Waka Kotahi – New Zealand Transport Agency. The formal transfer will take place in the next couple of weeks.

17. The tender documentation for the work at 89 Tripoli Road is being drafted and the plan is that a tender will be issued early in the New Year. All going to plan the project should be built this summer.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Transport. Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities department or Panuku, engagement has taken place. Any further engagement required with other parts of the council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Auckland Transport Consultations

21. Auckland Transport provides the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board with the opportunity to comment on transport projects being delivered in its area. The following consultations were sent to the local board during October 2020 for comment:

Location

Proposal

80 Lunn Ave

Auckland Transport proposes to install a new pedestrian island at 80 Lunn Avenue, Mount Wellington. People reported that it is unsafe to cross this part of Lunn Avenue and asked us to provide safe pedestrian facilities. See map below.

Traffic Control Committee resolutions

22. Traffic Control Committee (TCC) decisions are reported on a monthly basis. In the previous reporting period there was one TCC decision in the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area.

Table 1: Traffic Control Committee Summary of Decisions October 2020

Street	Area	Work	Decision
Banks/Boakes Road	Mt Wellington	No Stopping at all Times	Carried

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. The proposed decision of receiving this report has no impacts on Māori.

24. Auckland Transport is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsive or effective to Māori.

25. Our Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to Auckland’s 19 mana whenua groups in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The proposed decision of receiving this report has no financial implications for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. There is a risk that the procurement of the pedestrian facility at 89 Tripoli Road might come in at over the available budget.

28. To mitigate this, AT will seek other funding sources if necessary and report back to the local board as soon as possible.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. AT will provide another update report to the board in February 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy, Elected Member Relationship Manager, AT

Authorisers

Jonathan Anyon, Manager, Elected Member Relationship Unit, AT

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

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

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

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

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

[6] 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.

[7] 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.

Chairperson	Chris Makoare
Deputy Chairperson	Debbie Burrows
Members	Don Allan
	Nerissa Henry
	Peter McGlashan
	Maria Meredith
	Tony Woodcock