Agenda of Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 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

7.1 Petition - Residents of Sunnyside Crescent, Papatoetoe 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Deputation - Counties Manukau Sport 6

9 Public Forum 6

10 Extraordinary Business 6

11 Governing Body Member Update 9

12 Board Members' Report 11

13 Chairperson's Announcements 13

14 Auckland Transport Report November 2020 15

15 Auckland Transport – Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Innovating Streets Pilot Fund Decisions Report - November 2020 25

16 Local board views on Plan Change 53 - Temporary Activities and Pukekohe Park Precinct 37

17 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 43

18 Local board views on private plan change 43 to rezone the former McLaughlin’s Quarry, McLaughlin’s Road, Wiri 53

19 Approval for a new road name at 55 Hillside Road, Papatoetoe 65

20 Approval for a new road name at 34 Oakland Avenue, Papatoetoe 73

21 Approval of the Whitley Two Reserve Concept Plan 79

22 Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard 89

23 Local board resolution responses and information report 97

24 Governance Forward Work Calendar 103

25 Record of Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Workshop Notes 109

26 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 20 October 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

7.1 Petition - Residents of Sunnyside Crescent, Papatoetoe

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. A petition will be presented to the local board on behalf of residents of Sunnyside Crescent in Papatoetoe, concerned about speeding along both Sunnyside Crescent and Motatau Road and, a large truck parked on Sunnyside Road.

2. These issues are currently being investigated by Auckland Transport and will be reported back to the local board in Auckland Transport’s monthly report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) Thank the residents of Sunnyside Crescent in Papatoetoe for the petition.

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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 - Counties Manukau Sport

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

Russell Preston, Chief Executive Officer Counties Manukau Sport will be in attendance to discuss the Community Broker Executive Report – Otara-Papatoetoe 2020 with the board. The report is provided in Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) thank Russell Preston from Counties Manukau Sport for his attendance and presentation.

Attachments

a Counties Manukau Sport - Community Broker Executive Report Otara-Papatoetoe 2020...................................................................................................................... 119

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 ⇩	Auckland Transport monthly update report to the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board - November 2020	17

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Transport – Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Innovating Streets Pilot Fund Decisions Report and Governance Agreement	27

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/16397

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite the Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 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.^{^[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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board to express its views and preferences if it so wishes; and

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

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the Section 42A hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tony Reidy - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

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

File No.: CP2020/16035

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend that the Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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. 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	49
b ⇩	The Specified Development Project process	51

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Carol Stewart - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

Local board views on private plan change 43 to rezone the former McLaughlin’s Quarry, McLaughlin’s Road, Wiri

File No.: CP2020/14705

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a private plan change by Stonehill Trustees Limited to rezone land formerly known as the McLaughlin’s Quarry at Wiri. Figure 1 shows the locality of the Plan Change site and key local features. Attachment A.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report discusses a private plan change request (the request) received on 23 May 2019 from Stonehill Trustees Limited. The area subject to the request is the site of the former McLaughlin’s Quarry located in the Wiri industrial area. The quarrying activities have ceased, the site has been rehabilitated and a significant portion of the site has been developed in accordance with land use and subdivision resource consents^{^[6]} granted by Auckland Council.

The resource consent decision authorised a “blanket land use consent” enabling the plan change area to be utilised for business land use purposes, subject to conditions. Despite the significant development of the subject area for industrial activities, it continues to be zoned Quarry under the Auckland Unitary Pan (Operative in Part). Stonehill Trustees Limited have made a private plan change request to rezone the land.

3. The request seeks to:

a) Introduce a new Wiri Precinct into Chapter I Precincts (South) of the AUP(OP) to enable transition from quarry to industrial activities, while recognising the important cultural, ecological and geological values present within the precinct.

b) Rezone 20.87ha of land from Quarry Zone to Heavy Industry Zone.

c) Rezone 3.39ha of land from Quarry Zone to Light Industry Zone.

d) Rezone 1.91ha of land from Quarry Zone to Open Space – Informal Recreation Zone.

e) Rezone 0.29ha of land from Open Space – Informal Recreation Zone to Heavy Industry Zone.

f) Rezone 0.34ha of land from Open Space - Informal Recreation Zone to Light Industry Zone.

g) Amend the boundaries of the Outstanding Natural Features Overlay (ID 93 Matukutūreia and Matukuturua Lava Field and Tuff Ring).

h) Amend the description of Outstanding Natural Feature ID 93 Matukutūreia and Matukuturua Lava Field and Tuff Ring set out in Schedule 6: Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule, to correctly refer to the part of the geological feature as an explosion crater.

i) Amend the boundaries of the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Overlay (ID SEA T 8443) applied to the site at 79 McLaughlin’s Road.

4. Decision-makers on a private plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local boards’ views on the plan change, if the relevant local board(s) choose to provide their views.

5. Each local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board.^{^[7]}

6. This report is the mechanism for the local board to provide its views on the private plan change. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) provide local board views on the private plan change to rezone land at McLaughlin’s Quarry

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on the private plan change

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

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

7. 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.^{^[8]}

8. 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 private plan change, along with the submissions received on the plan change.

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

10. This report provides an overview of the private plan change.

11. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views. The planner must include any local board views in the evaluation of the private plan change.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. The private plan change consists of four key elements as described below.

13. Firstly, the request seeks to Introduce a new Wiri Precinct into Chapter I Precincts (South) of the AUP(OP) to enable transition from quarry to industrial activities, while recognising the important cultural, ecological and geological values present within the precinct.

14. Secondly, the request seeks the following rezoning of land within sub precincts (Areas A and B) of the plan change area (Refer Figures 2 and 3 below):

· Rezone 20.87ha of land from Quarry Zone to Heavy Industry Zone.

· Rezone 3.39ha of land from Quarry Zone to Light Industry Zone.

· Rezone 1.91ha of land from Quarry Zone to Open Space – Informal Recreation Zone.

· Rezone 0.29ha of land from Open Space – Informal Recreation Zone to Heavy Industry Zone.

· Rezone 0.34ha of land from Open Space - Informal Recreation Zone to Light Industry Zone

Figure 2: Sub-precincts

Figure 3: rezoning proposed

15. Thirdly, the request seeks to amend the boundaries of the Outstanding Natural Features Overlay (ID 93 Matukutūreia and Matukuturua Lava Field and Tuff Ring) as it applies within the plan change area (Figure 4). The intent of this request is to map the boundaries of Outstanding Natural Feature ID 93 within the plan change area, based on an assessment of matters set out in Policy B4.2.2(4) of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part). The request also seeks to amend the description of Outstanding Natural Feature ID 93 set out in Schedule 6: Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule, to refer to the part of the geological feature as an explosion crater.

Figure 4: Area requested to be removed from Outstanding Natural Feature (ID 93 Matukutūreia and Matukuturua Lava Field and Tuff Ring) – shown in red.

16. Fourthly, the request seeks a minor amendment to the boundaries of the Significant Ecological Area Overlay (ID SEA T 8443) applied to the site at 79 McLaughlin’s Road (Figure 5). The intent of the amendment is to map the extent of the Significant Ecological Area based on the relevant criteria for protection.

Figure 5: Area requested to be removed from Significant Ecological Area Overlay (ID SEA T 8443) – shown in black.

Themes from submissions received

17. A total of 27 submissions were received on the plan change.

18. Key submission themes include:

· Protection of archaeological and cultural values.

· Protection of ecological values associated with the Puhinui Stream and an existing wetland.

· Protection of an outstanding natural feature being a volcanic explosion crater and associated features.

· Reverse sensitivity effects.

· Transport effects.

19. Twelve submitters supported the plan change. These were typically from industries located in the plan change area or close to it.

20. One submitter supported the plan change in part – this being from Auckland Transport who wanted a number of transport matters attended to. Advice has subsequently been received from AT to advise that the matters they have raised have been settled to their satisfaction

21. Heritage New Zealand raised concerns regarding archaeological and ecological matters but identified that they support the plan change.

22. A number of submissions were received from iwi organisations (Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Ngati Tamaoho and Te Ākitai Waiohua Waka Taua Incorporated) who oppose the proposed plan change on cultural and other grounds. Ahikiwi Marae and Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority also made submissions in opposition.

23. The Geoscience Society of NZ also submitted in opposition being primarily concerned with the potential impact of the plan change of an outstanding natural feature (geological).

24. The Director-General of Conservation submitted in opposition seeking that sub-area B be rezoned to a more appropriate zone which protects the values of the site such as an Open Space zone, that the ONF overlay be retained and that the proposed plan change appropriately recognises and provides for the significance of this landscape to mana whenua.

25. There were also submitters from the local area who raised concerns related to reverse sensitivity effects which could result if a heavy industry zoning was to be imposed on land in the plan change area and which could be sensitive to hazardous facilities (e.g: submissions from the Department of Corrections and Wiri Oil Services Ltd)

26. A submission was also provided by Auckland Council which raises concerns regarding:

· the proposed zones and/or precinct provisions included in the private plan change request properly addressing the significant adverse cultural effects identified in the Cultural Values Assessments included with the application

· the zoning of part of sub precinct B to open space

· provision for appropriate stormwater management.

Table 1: Submissions received on plan change

Supporting/Opposing/In Part	Number of submission points
In support	28
Support in Part	1
In opposition	46

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

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=66

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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

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

28. The impact of climate change from sea level rise would be minor and modelled inundation shows the impact would be along the southern boundary of the land involved in the private plan change. The area identified as effected by sea level rise is unlikely to be an area which is identified for any building or structures.

29. The land adjacent to this southern boundary is proposed primarily for a setback from the Puhinui Stream and does not increase risk to property.

30. The proposed plan change will also consider riparian planting along streams to buffer the impacts of adverse storm events.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. A number of different parts of Council are inputting specialist views into the hearing report on the private plan change proposal.

32. Specifically, specialists in ecology, geoscience, archaeology, transport and stormwater management as well as planning are all involved in considering the private plan change.

33. Auckland Transport submitted on the plan change. It appears their concerns may have been settled through working with the applicant.

34. As discussed earlier, Auckland Council has also submitted on the plan change.

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

Local impacts and local board views

35. The subject plan change area sits within the Manurewa Local Board area. However, the site is located very close to the boundary of the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board area hence this report being provided to the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board.

36. 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 local board plan, local board agreement

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

37. 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

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

39. The applicant has undertaken consultation with iwi. As part of the private plan change process consultation occurred with Ngati te Ata Waiohua and Te Akitai Waiohua.

40. Both iwi have opposed the plan change.

41. As discussed above, submissions, which raised cultural issues were received on the private plan change from Ahikiwi Marae, Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua, Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority, Ngati Tamaoho and Te Ākitai Waiohua Waka Taua Incorporated.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43. Providing the views of the local board on this plan change does not have any financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

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

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

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

46. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s).^{^[9]} 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

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

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	McLaughlin’s Quarry at Wiri. Figure 1 - locality of the Plan Change site and key local features	63

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Craig Cairncross - Lead Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

Approval for a new road name at 55 Hillside Road, Papatoetoe

File No.: CP2020/15317

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 55 Hillside Road, Papatoetoe.

2. This is a resubmission of a previously deferred road naming application. Approval was first sought from the local board in 2019, but that decision was deferred under resolution CP2019/19750 in order “to allow the developer time for more thorough engagement with mana whenua”. This has now been actioned.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

4. The applicant, RSVP Trustee Ltd, has proposed the names presented in below for consideration by the local board.

5. Any of the five proposed road name options would be acceptable for the local board to approve for use in this location, having been assessed to ensure that they meet the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. Mana whenua have also been consulted and proposed three names.

6. The proposed names for the new private road at 55 Hillside Road are:

· Maumahara Way (applicant preferred, suggested by Te Ahiwaru Waiohua)

· Closey Court (alternative 1 - suggested by the Papatoetoe Historical Society)

· Te Waonui Court (alternative 2 - suggested by Te Ahiwaru Waiohua)

· Oho Lane (alternative 3 - suggested by Te Ahiwaru Waiohua)

· Jack Flood Lane (alternative 4 - suggested by the Papatoetoe Historical Society).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) approve the name Maumahara Way for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 55 Hillside Road, Papatoetoe, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60325612 and SUB60326252).

Horopaki

Context

7. Resource consent reference BUN60325612 (subdivision reference number SUB60326252) was issued in March 2019 for the construction of 16 residential freehold units and one commonly owned access lot (COAL).

8. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the COAL requires a road name because it serves more than five lots.

9. Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachments A and B respectively.

10. Local iwi have provided Te Reo Māori road name options, detailed below.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

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

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

13. The applicant originally chose names of Buddhist and Hindu origin, being one of the many religious identities represented in the community of Papatoetoe. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua considered these names and provided translations in Te Reo Māori. By doing so, Kowhai established meaningful cohesive names and was able to draw a connection to Te Ahiwaru Waiohua’s own cultural heritage and Māori identity through the names. The proposed names thus show and embed “the overarching spiritual bond shared by people of different cultures and beliefs”.

14. The applicant also sought assistance from the Papatoetoe Historical Society in order to establish names with a connection to the local area and the persons that contributed to the local community. To follow road naming guidelines, the names put forward (as outlined below) are of deceased persons.

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

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Maumahara Way (applicant preferred)	Te Reo Māori meaning: to remember or keep in memory the time of all things. The applicant originally proposed the name ‘Mount Kailash Way’, in reference to the Hindu Lord Shiva’s place of residence. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua then provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation of this name and its theme in relation to Te Ao Māori (Māori world view). By providing a translation into Te Reo, the name is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognises the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.
Closey Court (alternative 1)	This name was suggested by members of the Papatoetoe Historical Society in remembrance of the three Closey brothers, Robert Vincent (Bob), Septimus James Edgar (Edgar) and Frederick William. The brothers moved to Papatoetoe in 1928, and their building company, Closey Brothers, purchased eight acres of land bordered by Hill Road, Hillcrest Road, and Pah Road. Their plan was to build houses on this land. It was the beginning of the Great Depression in New Zealand and during the 1930s the three Closey brothers undertook voluntary work providing support and assistance to those in need. During the Depression Bob served on the special welfare committee formed in Auckland and was appointed welfare organiser for the whole area. As well as arranging relief work for the unemployed, he also sourced meat, vegetable, bread, coal, and firewood to be supplied to anyone in need. Bob was largely instrumental in the establishment of the Papatoetoe and Districts branch of the Returned Services Association. When Bob retired from his building work, he was able to devote all his time to his role of Welfare Officer and Treasurer at the Papatoetoe RSA. The construction of the current clubrooms in Wallace Road, opened in 1974, was a result of Bob’s hard work and determination. As the treasurer he undertook the fundraising so the clubrooms could be built. In November 1928 Edgar was elected as President of the Papatoetoe Welfare League. It was a time of growth for Papatoetoe and in his role of president, as well as working on support for the unemployed, Edgar advocated for infrastructure improvements for the rapidly growing town. This included improvements in rail services, postal services, and water supply. He led deputations to the government recommending for Auckland’s new airport to be located near Papatoetoe. Frederick was a bricklayer, and much of his brickwork is still standing in Papatoetoe today.
Te Waonui Court (alternative 2)	In Te Reo Māori ‘Te Waonui’ refers to the light and space between Papatūānuku (Earth) and Ranginui (sky) separations. This name is in close relationship to ‘Infinity Court’, which was one of the names originally proposed by the applicant. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation for ‘Infinity Court’. The name was suggested by the applicant to reflect the development of the land and the vast opportunities for the future. By providing a translation into Te Reo the name ‘Te Waonui Court’ is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognises the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.
Oho Lane (alternative 3)	In Te Reo Māori ‘Oho’ has two references, to be awakened and also Nga Oho being among the earliest Waiohua in this area. This name is in close relationship to ‘Bodhi Tree Lane’, which was one of the names originally proposed by the applicant. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation for ‘Bodhi Tree Lane’. The Bodhi tree, a central symbol in Buddhism, is the tree under which the Buddha found enlightenment. The name bodhi also means ‘awakening’. The scientific world recognises the spiritual associations with this tree as its botanical name, ficus religiosa, means ‘religious fig’. By providing a translation into Te Reo, the name ‘Oho Lane’ is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognizes the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.
Jack Flood Lane (Alternative 4)	This name was suggested by members of the Papatoetoe Historical Society in remembrance of Jack Flood, who was a WW2 veteran and the father of Ross Flood. Ross took part in the Athens Paralympics in 2004, and received the silver medal with his team mates in the sport of Boccia.

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Maumahara Way

(applicant preferred)

Te Reo Māori meaning: to remember or keep in memory the time of all things.

The applicant originally proposed the name ‘Mount Kailash Way’, in reference to the Hindu Lord Shiva’s place of residence. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua then provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation of this name and its theme in relation to Te Ao Māori (Māori world view).

By providing a translation into Te Reo, the name is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognises the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.

Closey Court

(alternative 1)

This name was suggested by members of the Papatoetoe Historical Society in remembrance of the three Closey brothers, Robert Vincent (Bob), Septimus James Edgar (Edgar) and Frederick William.

The brothers moved to Papatoetoe in 1928, and their building company, Closey Brothers, purchased eight acres of land bordered by Hill Road, Hillcrest Road, and Pah Road. Their plan was to build houses on this land.

It was the beginning of the Great Depression in New Zealand and during the 1930s the three Closey brothers undertook voluntary work providing support and assistance to those in need.

During the Depression Bob served on the special welfare committee formed in Auckland and was appointed welfare organiser for the whole area. As well as arranging relief work for the unemployed, he also sourced meat, vegetable, bread, coal, and firewood to be supplied to anyone in need. Bob was largely instrumental in the establishment of the Papatoetoe and Districts branch of the Returned Services Association.

When Bob retired from his building work, he was able to devote all his time to his role of Welfare Officer and Treasurer at the Papatoetoe RSA. The construction of the current clubrooms in Wallace Road, opened in 1974, was a result of Bob’s hard work and determination. As the treasurer he undertook the fundraising so the clubrooms could be built.

In November 1928 Edgar was elected as President of the Papatoetoe Welfare League. It was a time of growth for Papatoetoe and in his role of president, as well as working on support for the unemployed, Edgar advocated for infrastructure improvements for the rapidly growing town. This included improvements in rail services, postal services, and water supply. He led deputations to the government recommending for Auckland’s new airport to be located near Papatoetoe.

Frederick was a bricklayer, and much of his brickwork is still standing in Papatoetoe today.

Te Waonui Court

(alternative 2)

In Te Reo Māori ‘Te Waonui’ refers to the light and space between Papatūānuku (Earth) and Ranginui (sky) separations.

This name is in close relationship to ‘Infinity Court’, which was one of the names originally proposed by the applicant. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation for ‘Infinity Court’. The name was suggested by the applicant to reflect the development of the land and the vast opportunities for the future.

By providing a translation into Te Reo the name ‘Te Waonui Court’ is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognises the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.

Oho Lane

(alternative 3)

In Te Reo Māori ‘Oho’ has two references, to be awakened and also Nga Oho being among the earliest Waiohua in this area.

This name is in close relationship to ‘Bodhi Tree Lane’, which was one of the names originally proposed by the applicant. Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua provided and endorsed the Te Reo Māori translation for ‘Bodhi Tree Lane’. The Bodhi tree, a central symbol in Buddhism, is the tree under which the Buddha found enlightenment. The name bodhi also means ‘awakening’. The scientific world recognises the spiritual associations with this tree as its botanical name, ficus religiosa, means ‘religious fig’.

By providing a translation into Te Reo, the name ‘Oho Lane’ is meaningful to both mana whenua and the applicant. It also demonstrates and recognizes the diversity that has emerged in Auckland over the last few decades.

Jack Flood Lane

(Alternative 4)

This name was suggested by members of the Papatoetoe Historical Society in remembrance of Jack Flood, who was a WW2 veteran and the father of Ross Flood. Ross took part in the Athens Paralympics in 2004, and received the silver medal with his team mates in the sport of Boccia.

16. All the name options listed in the table above are acceptable for use, having been assessed by the Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. Therefore it is up to the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context.

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

18. ‘Way’, ‘Court’ and ‘Lane’ are acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the road, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

19. Mana whenua were consulted in line with agreed processes and requirements as outlined in the ‘Māori Impact Statement’ section of this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group. The views of council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The report seeks the decision of the local board and the decision is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

24. All Mana whenua with an interest in the area were contacted by the applicant. The only response received was from Kowhai Olsen of Te Ahiwaru Waiohua. Kowhai Olsen greatly assisted in providing Te Reo Māori translations for the names the applicant originally proposed. Kowhai also outlined the reasoning behind these translations, as described in the analysis chapter of this report, and was able to draw a connection to Te Ahiwaru Waiohua’s cultural heritage and Māori identity in general through the names, whilst also maintaining meaning for the applicant.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

27. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand and recorded on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by local councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Site & Location Plans	71

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrea Muhme - Planner

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

Approval for a new road name at 34 Oakland Avenue, Papatoetoe

File No.: CP2020/16394

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 34 Oakland Avenue, Papatoetoe.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria for proposed road names. The guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Kamau Limited, agent Hans Roukema of EA Civil Limited has proposed the names presented in the table below for consideration by the local board.

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. Mana Whenua have also been consulted.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 34 Oakland Avenue are:

· Hārapa Lane

· Noa Lane

· Wehi Lane

6. Although the applicant preferred the name ‘Wehi Lane’, this is not recommended due to the alternative translation of this word. It can mean awe but it can also mean fear and dread.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) approve the name Hārapa Lane for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 34 Oakland Avenue, Papatoetoe, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60353817 and SUB60353819).

Horopaki

Context

7. Resource consent BUN60353817 (subdivision reference number SUB660353819) was issued in August 2020 for the construction of 10 residential freehold units and one commonly owned access lot (COAL).

8. In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the COAL requires a name because it serves more than five lots.

9. Site and location plans of the development are provided in Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

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

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

12. The applicant has proposed Te Reo road names that they feel represent features of their development:

· the applicant has chosen the word Hārapa to refer to the fast pace of development on this site and the surrounding area

· the applicant has chosen the word Noa in reference to the meaning safe and unrestricted, in the hope that this is how the new residents will feel in their new homes.

· the applicant chose the word Wehi, because they wish residents and visitors alike to be held in awe upon living and visiting their new development. However, this name is not recommended for use due to the alternative translations of this word as it can mean awe but it can also mean fear and dread.

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

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Hārapa Lane

Te Reo Māori word meaning: (verb) to gallop, (noun) galloping

Noa Lane

Te Reo Māori word meaning:

(verb) to be free from the extensions of tapu, safe, unrestricted

(particle) used to denote an absence of limitations or conditions. As with other manner particles in Māori, while having a general overall meaning, noa can be translated in a variety of ways, depending on the context.

Wehi Lane

(applicant preferred, but not recommended for use due to alternative translations)

Te Reo Māori word meaning:

(verb) to be awesome, but can also mean afraid, fear.

(verb) to be terrible.

(noun) something awesome, a response of awe in reaction to ihi, but can also mean dread, fear

14. All the name options listed in this report have been assessed by the Council Subdivision team to ensure that they meet Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the National Addressing Standards for road naming. All technical standards are met and the names are not duplicated anywhere else in the region. Therefore it is up to the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context.

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

16. ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the road, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

17. Mana whenua were contacted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines. Road naming is an opportunity to recognise Māori cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land. The guidelines provide a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications. However, in this case no comments or feedback on the proposed names were received. Commentary on the engagement process is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section further below.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the Council group. The views of Council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. This report seeks the local board’s views and the decision is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. To aid local board decision making, the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua. This is done through the resource consent approval process, as well as a process to enable mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications.

22. Depending on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua. It is noted that this is a small infill development and the new road serving it is a small private access lot. Therefore, it is not surprising that no comments were received as mana whenua often have only limited resources and comment on developments of more significance in their areas of interest.

23. On 5^th October 2020 mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process. Representatives of the following mana whenua groups with an interest in the local area were contacted:

• Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

• Te Kawerau ā Maki

• Ngāti Tamaoho

• Te Ākitai Waiohua

• Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

• Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

• Ngāti Paoa

• Ngāti Maru

• Ngāti Tamaterā

• Waikato-Tainui

• Ngāti Whanaunga.

24. After the engagement period ended, no responses or suggestions for any other road name options were received by the facilitation service.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

26. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand and recorded on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by local councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Site & Location Plans	77

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrea Muhme - Planner

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

Approval of the Whitley Two Reserve Concept Plan

File No.: CP2020/15424

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval of the Whitley Two Reserve (Coopers Park) concept plan by the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In March 2018, the local community presented a petition at the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board business meeting requesting an increase in recreational provision at Whitley Two Reserve.

3. The Community Facilities Financial Year (FY) 2019/2020 Work Programme identified park asset renewal projects.

4. The Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board considered it timely to look at developing a concept plan for Whitley Two Reserve to ensure that community use and ongoing park sustainability is managed and maintained. The concept plan incorporates both renewal and development opportunities.

5. This initiative aligns with outcomes from consultation with local residents and the wider community. The feedback included the need for a safe gathering place offering a variety of activities for a diverse community with many interests.

6. Consultation and engagement took place with the local community, users of the park and residents through the Council online survey website “Have your say”. Feedback from these events helped inform the concept plan for Whitley Two Reserve and is responsive to the communities needs and desires.

7. The concept plan identifies opportunities to increase park activation through the provision of social gathering spaces, a potential learn to ride bike track, a basketball court and active all access play space for all ages.

8. At a workshop held on 17^th of April 2020 the local board indicated support for the concept plan and progressing to delivery within the FY 2020/2021.

9. It is important to note, the Reserve is known to the local community as Coopers Park. Whitley Two Reserve is the legal title of the site and aligns with a previous report, Whitley Two Reserve - Concept Plan Funding Request, Resolution number OP/2018/216.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board:

a) approve the Whitley Two Reserve Concept Plan as referenced in Attachment A of the agenda report.

Horopaki

Context

10. The Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board area has a population of over 86,300 and more than 100 ethnicities. Forty six percent (46%) identify as Pacific, twenty two percent (22%) Indian, twenty one percent (21%) European and sixteen percent Māori. (Refer to the Local Board Plan, 2017).

11. The Coopers Crescent and Whitley Crescent residents group consists of 70 households who meet monthly to discuss creating a more enjoyable and safer place to raise their families.

12. The resident’s group have been actively meeting for three years, building a strong presence within the community. There is also an online following showcasing local family events and gatherings.

13. Whitley Two Reserve is a neighbourhood scale park that provides a small playground, half basketball court and informal volleyball court.

14. Residents presented a petition to the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board at the 23 March 2018 business meeting requesting increased recreational provision at Whitley Two Reserve, Ōtara. Refer to Attachment B.

15. Specifically, the petition requested the installation of the following assets to enable the local community to utilise the park for active recreation and socialising:

i) barbeque and seating

ii) a playground upgrade

iii) shade

v) a fitness station

vi) a connecting path between Cooper Crescent and Whitley Crescent

vii) upgrade of the basketball half court and volleyball court.

16. The local community has limited access to recreation due to the location of arterial road corridors which include State Highway One and East Tamaki Road. The existing local parks network provides low recreational provision.

17. Support for additional park infrastructure has been minimal in recent years and park assets are expected to be reaching the end of their functional life. This provided the opportunity to review the park service provisions.

18. Design elements are proposed as follows:

· The existing playground is due for renewal. It is recommended that the play provision is increased to provide for a wider age group and provide for a wider range of abilities. Increased playground facilities will encourage visitors to stay at the reserve for longer periods of time.

· The renewal of the existing basketball court, replacement of the hoop, addition of seating and line markings to encourage longer playtimes.

· The renewal of the existing volleyball court surface.

· The installation of a 2m wide shared pathway connecting Whitley Crescent and Cooper Crescent, to improve connectivity and increase active recreation for a wider range of users.

· The construction of a learn to ride track will provide a safer space for children to ride their bicycles.

· The installation of fitness stations will increase recreational use in the reserve.

· The planting of a selection of trees and shrubs to enhance the landscape, particularly around the playground.

· The inclusion of bright colours and designs which will enhance sensory enjoyment.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. Whitley Two Reserve is bounded to the south-west by State Highway One which restricts access to recreation for the residents of Whitley Crescent and Cooper Crescent.

20. The two nearest parks that provide playgrounds are located at Sandbrook Reserve (630m) and Otamariki Reserve (830m). No other playgrounds are accessible on foot without crossing East Tamaki Road which is a major arterial route.

21. Whitley Two Reserve is a focal point for the local community who use the reserve as a meeting place and recreating space. However, the reserve and wider network suffers from low recreational provision to support the needs of the local community.

22. The assets requested by the local community are considered suitable for a neighbourhood-scale park, particularly in an area with low recreation provision. It is however recommended that barbecues only be installed at highly utilised suburban and destination parks and reserves, rather than neighbourhood parks due to high installation, maintenance and repair costs.

23. The consultation process has driven the development of this concept plan to ensure that the service and needs of the community have been captured. This insight was gained through surveys and face to face consultation with community leaders and members of the local board.

24. The renewals work programe will include the folowing:

· renewing the existing basketball court

· renewing the existing volleyball court

· renewing and upgrading the existing playground

25. The local board Locally Driven Initiatives budget funded additional equipment items, these are:

· fitness equipment

· a shared learn to ride pathway

· additional furniture, bench seats and picnic tables

· planting

· signage and directional designs and painting

26. The Whitley Two Reserve concept plan aims to increase utilisation of the reserve by providing a range of recreational opportunities. It also seeks to create and increase the reserves safety for the local community and families in the area, while meeting the increased level of service for that area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. In June 2019, Auckland Council declared a climate emergency and committed to look at ways on how climate implications can be considered in everything that council does. Auckland faces risks such as heat waves, droughts and tropical storms.

28. Retaining green spaces is a proven climate solution, as it reduces harmful carbon pollution that is driving climate change.

29. Ways on how to achieve this within projects is to extend the tree canopy by planting native trees and planting multiple native gardens. By strategically placing the playgrounds around shady cool spaces park users are protected from the rising heat.

30. All efforts to recycle and reuse existing materials will be made to reduce landfill impacts and new materials will be sustainably sourced.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. Council staff from Community Facilities and Community Services were engaged to form the recommendations in this report. Staff agree that the utilisation of the park will provide a wide range of recreation opportunities for the wider community.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. The local board provided feedback and advice on the draft concept plans at two workshops and one site visit during the current FY 19/20.

33. Outcome 3 of the Local Board Plan 2017 seeks to provide ‘Parks and facilities that meet people’s needs’. The concept plan works towards fulfilling this outcome.

34. The local board also aims to provide new and enhanced recreation opportunities for the community.

35. In addition, the local board wishes to optimise parks and other open spaces to ensure they respond to the needs of a growing community.

36. The concept plan will assist in meeting these aspirations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. All community assets contribute significantly to Māori well-being, values, culture, and traditions. Where it is anticipated that any aspects of the proposed project may have a significant impact on sites of importance to mana whenua, appropriate engagement will be undertaken.

38. Staff attended the Mana Whenua Parks Hui, April 2019 to introduce the project.

39. Mana whenua from Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Maru, Te Ahiwaru, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngaati Whanaunga attended.

40. Mana whenua support the communities' aspirations to increase activate and provide a safe space for everyone to enjoy.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. Allocation of locally driven initiatives (LDI) and renewals funding is specified below. (Local board resolution number OP/2020/108).

42. The project will be delivered in stages to accommodate the funding specified below.

Funding Source	FY 2021	FY 2022	Totals
Renewals	$526,231.00	$92,219.00	$618,450.00
LDI		100,000.00	$100,000.00

Total project budget			$718,450.00

43. Any savings realised will be returned to the local board, the local board will be able to reallocate the budget to an existing work programme activity or to create a new renewals or LDI activity.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. There is a Transpower pylon and conductor in the reserve. A high level of electricity runs through the transmission lines. Mandatory safe distance requirements for construction are set by the New Zealand Electrical Code of Practice 34 2001.

45. To ensure the safety of workers and residents in the area, a traffic management plan will be required before any works start. Ongoing monitoring throughout delivery will be implemented.

46. Project progression and delivery is dependent on a decision from the local board.

47. Should this project not proceed, it will mean that an identified service level gap will remain unfilled, resulting in continued recreational under provision for the community.

48. Public expectation has been raised to see improvements according to the feedback provided during consultation. If the plans are not supported by the local board, it could cause disappointment for locals, as well as contributing to a drop in consultation and engagement for future projects.

49. Physical works are to be programmed outside of the busy summer period to reduce public inconvenience and disturbance to the users of the reserve.

50. Subject to unanticipated delays through the consenting process, it is expected that the completion of the design, consent and tendering stages of the project will take a minimum of 20 weeks from approval. The physical works are anticipated to commence in February 2021.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

51. Subject to local board approval, staff will continue to plan procurement and delivery in preparation for resource consent approval.

52. The local board will receive monthly updates on the progress of this project through regular community facilities reporting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Whitley Two Reserve Concept Plan November 2020	85
b ⇩	Cooper Crescent Park Upgrade Submission Form	87

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jasmine Samuel - Community Led & LDI Specialist

Authorisers

Rod Sheridan - General Manager Community Facilities

Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board

17 November 2020

Community Facilities’ Sustainable Asset Standard

File No.: CP2020/16564

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 Ōtara-Papatoetoe 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^{^[10]} 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^{^[11]} 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	95

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Toto Vu-Duc - Manager Community Leases
Authoriser	Manoj Ragupathy – Acting General Manager Local Board Services

[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] Resource Consent No. 33887 – granted in December 2009 for Stage 1 subdivision and land use consent for part of the original parent sites, being 68 and 91 McLaughlins Road. The resource consent was for the subdivision of the parent sites into 29 lots for business purposes, road, esplanade and recreation reserves and a residue lot (Lot 100).

§ Resource Consent No. 39194 (stage 2 subdivision), involving regional stormwater discharge consent (No. 39328) and regional earthworks consent (No. 39901) for the development of Lot 100 into 22 lots was granted on 25 November 2011.

· Resource Consent No. 51522 SP 12591 granted on 3 November 2016 to create 19 fee simple business lots over three stages across the consented Stage 2 area.

· Variation to Condition 35 of Consent Notice 1088755.3 granted on 6 September 2019 to provide for a list of permitted activities generally aligned with the Light Industry Zone provisions of the AUP(OP) within 6 specified lots.

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

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

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

[10] 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.

[11] 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	Lotu Fuli
Deputy Chairperson	Dr Ashraf Choudhary, QSO, JP
Members	Apulu Reece Autagavaia
	Dr Ofa Dewes
	Swanie Nelson
	Ross Robertson, QSO, JP
	Dawn Trenberth

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Workshop Record, 6 October 2020	111
b ⇩	Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Workshop Record, 13 October 2020	113
c ⇩	Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Workshop Record, 27 October 2020	115

Author	Carol McGarry - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Manoj Ragupathy - Local Area Manager