I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Regulatory Committee will be held on:
Date: Time: Meeting Room: Venue:
|
Tuesday, 16 February 2021 10.00am Room 1, Level
26 |
Kōmiti Whakahaere ā-Ture/ Regulatory Committee
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Cr Linda Cooper, JP |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Cr Josephine Bartley |
|
Members |
Cr Dr Cathy Casey |
|
|
Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins |
|
|
Cr Shane Henderson |
|
|
Cr Daniel Newman, JP |
|
|
Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM |
|
|
IMSB Chair David Taipari |
|
|
Member Glenn Wilcox |
|
|
Cr Paul Young |
|
Ex-officio |
Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP |
|
|
Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore |
|
(Quorum 5 members)
|
|
Maea Petherick Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor
10 February 2021
Contact Telephone: 021583018 Email: maea.petherick@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Terms of Reference
Responsibilities
The committee is responsible for regulatory hearings (required by relevant legislation) on behalf of the council. The committee is responsible for appointing independent commissioners to carry out the council’s functions or delegating the appointment power (as set out in the committee’s policy). The committee is responsible for regulatory policy and bylaws. Where the committee’s powers are recommendatory, the committee or the appointee will provide recommendations to the relevant decision-maker.
The committee’s key responsibilities include:
· decision-making (including through a hearings process) under the Resource Management Act 1991 and related legislation
· hearing and determining objections under the Dog Control Act 1996
· decision-making under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
· hearing and determining matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002 (this cannot be sub-delegated)
· hearing and determining matters arising under bylaws
· appointing independent hearings commissioners to a pool of commissioners who will be available to make decisions on matters as directed by the Regulatory Committee
· deciding who should make a decision on any particular matter including who should sit as hearings commissioners in any particular hearing
· monitoring the performance of regulatory decision-making
· where decisions are appealed or where the committee decides that the council itself should appeal a decision, directing the conduct of any such appeals
· considering and making recommendations to the Governing Body regarding the regulatory and bylaw delegations (including to Local Boards)
· recommending bylaws to the Governing Body for consultation and adoption
· reviewing local board and Auckland water organisation proposed bylaws and making recommendations to the Governing Body
· appointing panels to hear and deliberate on public feedback related to regulatory policy and bylaw matters
· deciding regulatory policies that are not otherwise the responsibility of another committee
· deciding regulatory policies, standards and controls associated with bylaws including those delegated to the former Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, under resolution GB/2012/157 (dogs) and GB/2014/121 (alcohol)
· receiving local board feedback on bylaw and regulatory policy development and review
· adopting or amending a policy or policies and making any necessary sub-delegations relating to any of the above areas of responsibility to provide guidance and transparency to those involved.
Not all decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 and other enactments require a hearing to be held and the term “decision-making” is used to encompass a range of decision-making processes including through a hearing. “Decision-making” includes, but is not limited to, decisions in relation to applications for resource consent, plan changes, notices of requirement, objections, existing use right certificates, certificates of compliance, regulatory policy and bylaws and also includes all necessary related decision-making.
In adopting a policy or policies and making any
sub-delegations, the committee must ensure that it retains oversight of
decision-making and that it provides for councillors to be involved in
decision-making in appropriate circumstances.
For the avoidance of doubt, these delegations confirm the existing delegations (contained in the chief executive’s Delegations Register) to hearings commissioners and staff relating to decision-making under the RMA and other enactments mentioned below but limits those delegations by requiring them to be exercised as directed by the Regulatory Committee.
Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:
All Bylaws
Biosecurity Act 1993
Building Act 2004
Dog Control Act 1996
Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987
Gambling Act 2003
Health Act 1956
Land Transport Act 1998
Local Government Act 1974
Local Government Act 2002
Local Government (Auckland Council Act) 2009
Maritime Transport Act 1994
Psychoactive Substances Act 2013
Resource Management Act 1991
Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Waste Minimisation Act 2008
Related Regulations
Powers
(i) All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities.
Except:
(a) powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2)
(b) where the committee’s responsibility is limited to making a recommendation only.
(ii) Power to establish subcommittees.
Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting
Members of the public
All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.
Those who are not members of the public
General principles
· Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.
· Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.
· Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.
· In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.
Members of the meeting
· The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).
· However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.
· All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.
Independent Māori Statutory Board
· Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.
· Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.
Staff
· All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.
· Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.
Local Board members
· Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain. This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.
Council Controlled Organisations
· Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.
Regulatory Committee 16 February 2021 |
|
ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
1 Apologies 9
2 Declaration of Interest 9
3 Confirmation of Minutes 9
4 Petitions 9
5 Public Input 9
6 Local Board Input 9
7 Extraordinary Business 10
8 Proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 11
9 Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 - Options Report 2021 81
10 Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 16 February 2021 129
11 Summary of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 16 February 2021 141
12 Objection to stormwater works at 88 Calliope Road, Stanley Point 181
13 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
An apology from Mayor P Goff has been received.
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.
That the Regulatory Committee: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 17 November 2020 as a true and correct record.
|
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public input had been received.
Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.
This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.
At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.
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.”
Regulatory Committee 16 February 2021 |
|
Proposal to amend the Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015
File No.: CP2021/00490
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To recommend the Governing Body adopt a proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 for public consultation and to appoint a bylaw panel.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Staff seek a recommendation that the Governing Body adopt the attached Statement of Proposal containing an amended Bylaw for public consultation.
3. The amended Bylaw continues to protect public water supply and wastewater networks from damage, misuse, interference, illegal connections and contamination. It complies with statutory requirements, is appropriate and is not inconsistent with key legislation.
4. Key proposed amendments include to:
· add examples of “prohibited waste” such as wipes, sanitary products, fats and grease
· extend the rule about unauthorised taking of water from more than just fire hydrants
· clarify terms including new definitions of “combined system”, “combined system area”, “groundwater”, “private water supply scheme” and “stormwater inflow”
· clarify that no person may physically obstruct or interfere with Watercare’s access to the network
· clarify Watercare’s acceptance and liability for water supply and wastewater assets
· clarify rules about the protection of water supply from contamination by a private water scheme
· clarify that people need approval to discharge to the public wastewater network
· update the format and wording of the Bylaw and include Related Information tables
· clarify the offences under the Bylaw including unauthorised discharge to the wastewater network
· clarify what works can occur near water supply or wastewater networks.
· clarify statutory powers may be used to enforce Bylaw.
5. There is a low risk that the proposed changes do not reflect the views of the public (or certain members of the infrastructure industry) and that another COVID-19 outbreak may prevent in-person public consultation. These risks are partly mitigated by the opportunity for public feedback, online or phone-based ‘Have Your Say’ events and bylaw panel deliberations. There is also some risk of misunderstandings of what this bylaw can do, and cannot do, and that “instant fines” cannot be issued for infringements.
6. Adoption of the Statement of Proposal will start the statutory process to amend the Bylaw including public consultation scheduled to begin in April 2021. A bylaw panel will consider any public feedback, deliberate, and make recommendations to the Governing Body in July 2021. A final decision is expected to be made in August 2021.
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) note that this committee completed the review of the Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 in May 2020 and determined that a bylaw is still the most appropriate way to protect Auckland’s water sources and water supply and wastewater networks from damage, misuse and interference, but that the bylaw could be improved by making certain amendments to it.
b) recommend the Governing Body adopt the Statement of Proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report for public consultation, and confirm that the proposed amended Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015:
i) is the most appropriate form of a bylaw
ii) does not give rise to any implications under, and is not inconsistent with, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.
c) recommend the Governing Body forward to the Independent Māori Statutory Board the Statement of Proposal in (b) for their advice.
d) recommend the Governing Body forward to local boards this agenda report and attachment for their information.
e) appoint a chair and two bylaw panel members selected from the Governing Body, the Independent Māori Statutory Board and Watercare to attend ‘Have Your Say’ events to deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on public feedback to the Statement of Proposal in (b).
f) delegate authority to the Regulatory Committee chairperson to make replacement appointments to the bylaw panel if a panel member is unavailable.
g) delegate authority through the Chief Executive of Watercare:
i) to
appoint staff to receive public feedback at ‘Have Your Say’ events;
ii) to make any amendments to the Proposal in (b) to correct errors, omissions or to reflect decisions made by the Regulatory Committee or the Governing Body.
Horopaki
Context
The Bylaw protects water supply and wastewater networks
7. The Governing Body adopted Ture ā Rohe Whakarato Wai me te Pae Kōtuitui Wai Para 2015 / Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) on 25 June 2015 (GB/2015/62). This Auckland Council Bylaw is administered by Watercare Services Limited.
8. This Bylaw seeks to protect the water supply and wastewater networks by:
· requiring authorisation from Watercare to connect to or disconnect from the water supply or wastewater network and enabling Watercare to refuse connections where there is insufficient network capacity
· ensuring appropriate standards for any new infrastructure under Watercare's control
· protecting the quality of the water supply and prohibiting illegal use from hydrants
· managing work near the water supply and wastewater network to protect it from damage
· allowing for restricting the water supply to maintain enough drinking water in the event of drought or other emergency
· managing inflows and illegal dumping of material into the wastewater network to avoid wastewater overflows.
The Bylaw is part of a wider regulatory framework
9. The Bylaw is aligned with the strategic directions in the Auckland Plan 2050 to “improve the education, health and safety of Aucklanders, with a focus on those most in need” and to “grow a business friendly and well-functioning city”.
10. The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework. Issues related to access to private property are addressed under the Local Government Act 2002 while those related to the compliance with water quality are addressed under the Health Act 1956.
11. In addition, uniquely to Auckland, Watercare has a contractual relationship with its customers. This enables the Bylaw to focus on matters relating to the impact of household and businesses’ behaviours on the public assets, while the customer contract addresses the rights and obligations for each customer’s water and wastewater connection.
The Regulatory Committee decided to amend the Bylaw 2015
12. The Emergency Committee requested staff to commence the process to amend the Bylaw in May 2020 (EME/2020/81). This decision followed completion of a statutory bylaw review under the Local Government Act 2002[1] and consideration of the review findings and four options.
13. Council must use the special consultative procedure to amend the Bylaw,[2] including to:
· determine that the amended bylaw meets legislative criteria
· adopt a statement of proposal, including the proposed amended bylaw, for public consultation
· decide on any bylaw amendments following consideration of public feedback.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Bylaw amendments to improve certainty and clarity
14. The Statement of Proposal (Attachment A) implements the committee’s decision to amend the Bylaw and to make further improvements identified during the drafting process.
15. Key amendments proposed include:
Reasons for proposal |
|
include examples of “prohibited waste” such as wipes, sanitary products, fats and grease |
· to improve understanding of these types of problematic wastes that can block wastewater networks |
extend the rule about unauthorised taking of water from more than just fire hydrants |
· to clarify that this rule would apply to any unauthorised taking of water (stealing without paying for) |
clarify terms including new definitions of “combined system”, “combined system area”, “groundwater”, “private water supply scheme” and “stormwater inflow” |
· to improve clarity of terms used within the Bylaw |
clarify that no person may physically obstruct or interfere with Watercare’s access to the network |
· to improve certainty in relation to Watercare access to its network |
clarify Watercare’s acceptance and liability for water supply and wastewater assets and what is meant by the term “standards” |
· to improve the clarity of the term “standards” and provide greater certainty in relation to the acceptance, or not, of any vested assets |
clarify rules about the protection of water supply from contamination by a private water scheme |
· to improve the certainty of these rules |
clarify that people need approval to discharge to the public wastewater network |
· to
add clarity to existing rules of unauthorised connections |
update the format and wording of the Bylaw and include Related Information tables |
· to align with current best practice drafting standards · to make the rules easier to read and understand |
clarify the offences under the Bylaw including unauthorised discharge to the wastewater network |
· to improve clarity of offences |
clarify rules related to works near water supply or wastewater networks |
· to add clarity to what works can occur near water supply or wastewater networks |
clarify statutory powers may be used to enforce Bylaw |
· to add clarity in relation to statutory powers |
16. The amended bylaw has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements as:
· it will help protect networks from damage, decrease potential for drinking water contamination and provide for effective water management during water restrictions
· it is authorised by statute, not repugnant to other legislation and not unreasonable
· it does not give rise to any implications and is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990
· it is not inconsistent with the Resource Management Act 1991 or Auckland Unitary Plan
· it will be easier to read and understand.
17. Staff seek the Regulatory Committee to recommend that the Governing Body adopt the attached Statement of Proposal containing the amended bylaw for public consultation. No significant changes are proposed - the amendments are generally to help improve readability, provide greater information, and increase the clarity of this bylaw.
18. The Committee is requested to appoint a bylaw panel to attend ‘Have Your Say’ events as appropriate, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on public feedback to the Proposal.
19. It is also recommended that staff be delegated authority to receive public feedback at ‘Have Your Say’ events as appropriate or in case a panel member cannot attend.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
20. By limiting damage to public pipes and associated infrastructure, the Bylaw reduces the need for concrete pipe repairs and some wastewater related discharges into the environment, and the amount of carbon embedded in network operations and maintenance.
21. By imposing water use restrictions in case of an emergency or a drought, the Bylaw enables Auckland’s water supply for essential needs while addressing a changing climate such as hotter days and changing rainfall patterns.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
22. The Bylaw impacts the operations of many Watercare teams in charge of the operations and the planning of water sources and water and wastewater networks. It also impacts some Auckland Council teams involved in compliance and stormwater management. Watercare staff have worked closely with Auckland Council’s Bylaw team, and the current Stormwater Bylaw review is also aware of Watercare’s review process.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
24. Communication was received from one local board in relation to wastewater overflows, a matter unrelated to Bylaw, and already covered by the Resource Management Act 1991.
25. This low interest in the Bylaw review is consistent with the Auckland Council’s classification of the Bylaw as low community interest and has no impact on local governance under the agreed principles and processes for Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
26. The Bylaw can contribute to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations of Manaakitanga (Improve Quality of Life "Satisfaction with our environments and standard of living") and Kaitiakitanga (Ensure Sustainable Futures "lntergenerational Reciprocity") by ensuring the public water supply and wastewater network is future proofed and not contaminated or damaged, which would be detrimental to the people and the natural environment.
27. Input by mana whenua was sought at a special hui of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in January 2020. The main concerns related to environmental issues beyond the Bylaw scope such as archaeological sites and clarifications of asset ownership and responsibilities.
28. Staff sought input by mana whenua on the proposed options in June 2020. A meeting with the Chair of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum confirmed his support of the direction taken and recommended a written update to carry on the engagement.
29. Watercare staff presented an update of what the Bylaw is about, suggested amendments, and an outline of the review process to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in October 2020. No major concerns were identified. Mana whenua and mataawaka will have the opportunity to give feedback on the proposal during public consultation.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
30. The cost of the Bylaw review will be met by Watercare Services Limited within existing budgets.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
31. It is possible that some members of the public, infrastructure industry or business owners may oppose some of the proposed amendments. There is also a risk of misunderstanding about what this bylaw can and cannot do - for example “instant fines” cannot be issued for infringements. Not all of these risks are avoidable, but they are partly mitigated by the opportunity for public feedback, the communication material used for community engagement, online or phone-based ‘Have Your Say’ events and bylaw panel deliberations. There is also a risk that impacts from another COVID-19 outbreak could affect the value of any received feedback.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
32. If approved, the next steps are shown in the diagram below:
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Statement of Proposal to amend the Auckland Council Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 |
19 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Mark Bishop, Principal Policy Planner, Watercare Services Limited |
Authoriser |
Steve Webster – Chief Infrastructure Officer – Watercare Services Limited |
16 February 2021 |
|
Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 - Options Report 2021
File No.: CP2021/00177
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To seek a decision on the preferred statutory option to progress the review of Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. To enable the Regulatory Committee to determine the future of the Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw, staff have completed an options report.
3. On 13 October 2020 the Committee endorsed the review findings on the Bylaw (REG/2020/64) and requested a report back on options.
4. Key review findings included that the Bylaw is well-used and is working well, it fills a regulatory gap and continues to be necessary to address issues, but could be improved.
5. This report focusses on options about whether a new bylaw is required to address each of the 11 topics regulated by the bylaw, and if any changes to the rules within each topic are needed. A new bylaw (as opposed to an amended bylaw) must be made because the current Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022. Any new bylaw would improve the current Bylaw structure and wording.
6. Staff recommend that the Committee direct staff to prepare a statement of proposal based on Option 2: new bylaw that:
· makes a new bylaw to address new and continuing issues related to the 11 topics listed in recommendation (a)
· makes changes to some rules within the 11 topics including merging some trading activities, separating filming from events and setting specific rules for micromobility.
7. Taking this approach will commence the process of adopting a new bylaw that is easier to understand by a wide range of audiences.
8. There is a low risk that some stakeholders or the public may express concern about the proposed options. This risk is mitigated by future public consultation on any new Bylaw.
9. If approved, staff will prepare a Statement of Proposal for approval by the Regulatory Committee and Governing Body. Public engagement will follow, with the Governing Body making its final decision before the end of the year.
Recommendation/s That the Regulatory Committee: a) agree that a new bylaw is the most appropriate way to protect the public from safety risks and nuisance in, and the misuse of, council-controlled public places related to:
b) request that staff as delegated by the Chief Executive prepare a Statement of Proposal that: i) makes a new trading, events and filming in public places bylaw under Local Government Act 2002, Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and Land Transport Act 1998 ii) address the matters detailed in paragraph 28 and Appendix 1 of Attachment A for the topics in (a) of the agenda report. |
Horopaki
Context
The Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places
10. The Governing Body on 26 February 2015 adopted Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Hokohoko, Whakahaerenga i ngā Wāhi Tūmatanui / Auckland Council Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 (GB/2015/4).
11. The Bylaw seeks to protect the public from safety risks and nuisance in, and the misuse of, council-controlled public places (for example, parks, reserves, civic spaces and roads) caused by trading, event and filming activities.
12. The Bylaw aligns with strategic directions in the Auckland Plan 2050 by providing the public with access to recreational or cultural activities, increasing travel choices for Aucklanders and creating a resilient economy.
The Bylaw is part of a wider regulatory framework
13. The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the Reserves Act 1977, Trespass Act 1980, Fair Trading Act 1986, Resource Management Act 1991, Customer Guarantees Act 1993, Road User Rule 2004, Electricity (Safety) Regulations 2010, Auckland Unitary Plan, Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 and Signage Bylaw 2015.
14. The Bylaw is also supported by several operational guidelines, policies, protocols and codes to ensure a consistent approach to Bylaw implementation across Auckland.
15. Auckland Transport has a mirror bylaw to regulate street trading and other activities on the Auckland Transport System (roads and footpaths) for transport-related purposes.
16. Since 1 February 2018, Auckland Council Licensing and Regulatory Compliance Unit enforces compliance with both bylaws.
The Bylaw expires in 2022 and if still needed, must meet certain statutory requirements
17. The Bylaw will expire on 26 February 2022. The council must decide whether a bylaw about trading, events and filming in public places is still required, and (if a bylaw is necessary) adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.
18. Any new bylaw must be well-drafted, meet the requirements of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, Local Government Act 2002, Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and Land Transport Act 1998 and be adopted using a public consultative process.
19. If the Bylaw is no longer required, council can decide to revoke the Bylaw or allow it to expire using a public consultative process.
Regulatory Committee decided a bylaw is still needed and requested options
20. On 23 June 2020, the Regulatory Committee endorsed the findings of a review of the Bylaw (REG/2020/30). Key findings were:
· a bylaw remains the most appropriate way to manage trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places to help mitigate safety risks, nuisance or misuse
· the Bylaw is well-used, and there is a high level of compliance and widespread awareness of Bylaw rules among operators
· the Bylaw fills a regulatory gap and complements other regulations (for example events and filming that do not require resource consents)
· council and council-controlled organisations proactively implement the Bylaw through education and by issuing approvals (licences, permits) and monitoring compliance
· potential Bylaw improvements include merging some trading activities, separating filming from events, setting specific rules for micromobility and making the Bylaw easier to understand by a wide range of audiences.
21. The Committee requested an options report to help it decide how best to respond to the findings and which activities (topics) still need a bylaw.
22. In addition, the Committee requested though the Auckland Council Chief Executive to invite the Auckland Transport to allocate his staff to participate in options development.
Staff used the findings report to develop an options report for all 11 topics in the Bylaw
23. Staff used the findings report to develop the Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 Options Report 2021 in Attachment A. This included defining the problem, objective and outcome sought for 2020 and beyond, developing options for each of the 11 topics in the current Bylaw and assessing each option against assessment criteria.
A joint working group has provided feedback on the options report
24. The Committee appointed a joint working group to consider statutory options in response to the findings from the review (REG/2020/3). The joint working group includes representatives from the Committee, local boards and the Independent Māori Statutory Board. Staff will table this group’s views at the meeting.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
The problem, objective and outcome relate to public safety, nuisance and misuse
25. Based on the findings, the problem, objective and outcome can be defined as follows:
26. Table below provides more detailed description of current and future problems, the scale and magnitude of the problem and benefits from trading, events and filming:
Current and future problem |
· preventable accidents, injuries and nuisance from obstructed or cluttered paths of travel from furniture, structures or displayed goods exceeding allocated space. · restricted access to medical emergencies, entrances or exits from closure of footpaths and roads · nuisance from amplified sound, lighting, inadequate waste management, litter, parking and traffic congestion, objectionable performances / material, intimidating behaviour · reduction of available public space, location overuse for private benefit, unlicensed or non-compliant operation · preventable collisions, accidents and injuries to pedestrians and footpath users with vision and hearing impairments, accessibility needs, the elderly and children from, or injuries to users of, micromobility devices rented from council-controlled public places. |
Scale and magnitude of the problem |
· the number of complaints received is relatively low, an average of about 27 a month · the number of complaints in most categories have plateaued in the last few years · problems related to e-scooters and e-bikes have decreased from 122 complaints during trails to 32 self-reported accidents or incidents and 34 deployment and parking issues identified by council monitoring. ACC data is also trending down. |
Benefits from trading, events and filming |
· since 2016 council has issued over 2,800 licences for trading activities allowing Aucklanders to participate in these activities while reducing safety risks and nuisance · since 2018 council has issued 25 licences to operators of rental micromobility devices. This has enabled council to increase travel choices for Aucklanders by enabling allocation of 2,490 rental e-scooters, 900 e-bikes and 50 bikes between September and December 2020 · since 2015 council and Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development) have issued over 6,000 event permits from smaller-scale local and community events to major events. The number of permits remains consistently high helping to generate more than 400 million dollars for the regional economy and more than 2.5 million visitor nights · since 2015 Screen Auckland has issued over 3,300 film permits, almost doubling approval numbers from 385 in 2015 to 614 in 2019. The number of approvals reflects the importance of the screen industry in Auckland which generated gross revenue of over one billion dollars in 2018 by employing 4,000 skilled crew and 1,700 businesses. |
Statutory options to respond to the outcome sought include a new bylaw
27. Staff identified the following options for each of the 11 topics in the current Bylaw to achieve the outcome sought:
28. The table below provides a summary of the full assessment contained in the Appendix 1 of the Attachment A. Each topic in the full assessment provides a description of what the current Bylaw does, how it is implemented, the statutory authority, the issues and outcomes sought both now and in 2015, assessment of the options and recommendations.
Bylaw topic |
Summary of staff assessment |
Recommended direction for any changes |
||
Is Bylaw appropriate to address issues? |
Is the current Bylaw structure and wording appropriate? |
Is Bylaw valid and consistent with the Bill of Rights? |
||
Markets and stalls |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Mobile shops |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Outdoor dining |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Fundraising |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Offering commercial services |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Distribution of promotional goods or materials |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Street performance (busking / pavement art) |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Outdoor display of goods |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Micromobility |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Events |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
Filming |
ü |
û |
ü |
Adopt new bylaw |
A new bylaw is recommended to be made for all topics regulated by the current Bylaw
29. Staff recommend that a new bylaw (Option 2: New Bylaw) be made for each of the 11 topics regulated by the current Bylaw. A new bylaw would:
· be the most appropriate way to protect the public from safety risks and nuisance in, and the misuse of, council-controlled public places
· help minimise the risk from preventable collisions, accidents, injuries, obstructions and nuisance in council-controlled public places
· help manage the use of council-controlled public places from the privatisation of public space, location overuse or negative impacts of temporary activities
· be easier to understand than the current Bylaw and meet bylaw drafting standards
· be authorised by statute, not repugnant to other legislation, or be unreasonable
· not give rise to any implications and be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act 1990
· not be inconsistent with the Reserves Act 1977, Resource Management Act 1991, Auckland Unitary Plan or Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 and Signage Bylaw 2015.
30. While relying on other existing methods (Option 1: Other methods) may reduce regulation, it would limit council’s effectiveness and efficiency in addressing the problems. Key trades-off are:
· inability to regulate micromobility devices (no substantial regulation yet by central government), and events and filming that do not require resource consents
· the process to warn and convict through the courts under the Trespass Act 1980 takes longer, provides council with no ability to stop the activity only to exclude from location or disallow entry, and has lower monetary deterrence than a bylaw.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
31. The Bylaw does not directly impact climate change.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
32. The Bylaw directs the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations such as Auckland Council’s Licencing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Auckland Transport, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Environmental Health, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development) and Screen Auckland.
33. Relevant staff provided feedback to the review and suggested technical improvements addressed in the options report. Council teams are aware of the impacts of possible changes to the Bylaw and their implementation role.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
34. This Bylaw has impact on local governance as it regulates trading, events and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example parks.
35. The Regulatory Committee established a joint working party that includes two local board members to provide views on statutory options in response to the findings. The views of the working group will be tabled at the meeting.
36. All local boards will have an opportunity to provide their views on a draft Statement of Proposal.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
37. The Bylaw supports the Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau by facilitating opportunities for Māori business owners such as those participating in major or international events to promote distinctive identity, build exposure and establish valuable networks.
38. Feedback from mana whenua and some Māori license and permit holders highlighted a particular interest and concern for environmental impacts such as ineffective waste management at events and the limited level of enforcement. There was however general support for activities (particularly events) that promote whānau wellbeing and health.
39. The recommended changes to address waste management at events would continue to be supported by a new bylaw in a way that is easier to understand. Other concerns for better enforcement relate to Bylaw implementation rather than its making.
40. Staff will proactively engage with mana whenua and mataawaka during any future public consultation to provide an opportunity to provide their views on any new bylaw.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
41. The cost of reviewing the Bylaw and its implementation will be met within existing budgets.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
42. The following risk has been identified:
If… |
Then… |
Mitigation |
Stakeholders or the public are opposed or concerned about the proposed options. |
There may be negative attention to council about its Bylaw review processes and consultation to date. |
Future opportunity for stakeholders and the public to provide feedback on the proposed Bylaw as part of the statutory public consultation process. |
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
43. If approved, the next steps are shown in the diagram below:
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 Review |
89 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Authors |
Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst Sam Bunge - Graduate Policy Advisor Katie Kim - Graduate Policy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Kataraina Maki – General Manager - Community & Social Policy Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services |
16 February 2021 |
|
Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 16 February 2021
File No.: CP2021/00651
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To provide an update of all current resource consent appeals lodged with the Environment Court.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This memorandum provides a summary of current resource consent appeals to which the Auckland Council is a party. It updates the report to the Regulatory Committee on 17 November 2020.
3. If committee members have detailed questions concerning specific appeals, it would be helpful if they could raise them prior to the meeting with Robert Andrews (phone: 353-9254) or email: robert.andrews@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz) in the first instance.
Recommendation/s
That the Regulatory Committee:
a) receive the Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 12 February 2021
Horopaki
Context
5. The principal specialist planners - resource consents, continue to resolve these appeals expeditiously. In the period since preparing the previous status report on 9 November 2020, there have been four new appeals lodged and two resolved.
6. Three new appeals are from submitters opposed to the grant of consent to the shared (pedestrian and cycle) pathway along the edge of the Whau estuary. The 15km link connects the current SH 16 path to Green Bay via a series of parks, roads and coastal boardwalks. The appeal by Spam Farm Boat Yard Limited concerns the height of the boardwalk at the Wairau Creek Tributary preventing access for marine vessels. The appeals by E Wood & S Henton and C Corcoran seek alternative routes for parts of the pathway and/or variations to conditions.
7. The other new appeal from AK Rental and Investments Ltd relates to the refusal to a residential development (new dwelling and 2 lot subdivision) at 34 Atkinson Road, Titirangi. While lodgement of the appeal was accepted by the Court in early December 2020, council is of the view that there is no appeal right for this residential activity. The application lodged in 2018 predates the 30 September 2020 RMA Amendment at which time appeal rights for residential activities were re-introduced into the Act. Councils position as been referred to the Court.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
8. To receive the report as provided.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
10. Not applicable.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
11. Not applicable.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
13. The Resource Management Act 1991 includes a number of matters under Part 2, which relate to the relationship of Tangata Whenua to the management of air, land and water resources. Maori values associated with the land, air and freshwater bodies of the Auckland Region are based on whakapapa and stem from the long social, economic and cultural associations and experiences with such taonga. These matters where relevant are considered with the resolution of the resource consent appeals.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
14. Environment Court appeal hearings can generate significant costs in terms of commissioning legal counsel and expert witnesses. Informal mediation and negotiation processes seek to limit these costs. Although it can have budget implications, it is important that Auckland Council, when necessary, ensure that resource consents maintain appropriate environmental outcomes and remain consistent with the statutory plan policy framework through the appeal process.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
16. Not applicable.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Current Resource Consent Appeals as at 3 February 2021 |
133 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Robert Andrews - Principal Specialist Planning |
Authorisers |
Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services |
16 February 2021 |
|
Summary of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 16 February 2021
File No.: CP2021/00553
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A.
2. To receive a summary and provide a public record of memos or briefing papers that have been held or distributed to committee members since 17 November 2020.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
3. This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide public visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo or other means, where no decisions are required.
4. The following papers / memos were circulated to members:
Date |
Subject |
29/01/2021 |
Public feedback on proposals to amend the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and the Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014, and next steps |
5. These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link: http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
· at the top of the left page, select meeting “Regulatory Committee” from the drop-down tab and click ‘view’;
· under ‘attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘extra attachments’.
6. Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.
Recommendation/s That the Regulatory Committee: a) receive the summary of the Regulatory Committee report – 16 February 2021. |
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Regulatory Committee forward work programme |
143 |
b⇩ |
Memo: Public feedback on proposals to amend the Alcohol Control Bylaw 2014 and the Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014, and next steps |
151 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Maea Petherick - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor |
Authoriser |
Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services |
Regulatory Committee 16 February 2021 |
|
Kōmiti
Whakahaere ā-Ture / Regulatory Committee This committee deals with regulatory hearings, appointing independent commissioners and for the development of regulatory policy and bylaws. The full terms of reference can be found here. |
Area of work and Lead Department |
Reason for work |
Committee role (decision and/or direction) |
Expected timeframes Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2021 |
|||||||||||
no meeting |
Feb |
Mar |
Apr |
May |
Jun |
Jul |
Aug |
Sep |
Oct |
Nov |
Dec |
|||
Alcohol Licensing Licensing & Regulatory Compliance |
Report on the revenue received and the costs incurred for the alcohol licensing process – required by regulation 19 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013. |
Note that the majority of alcohol licensing costs were recovered from the existing default licensing fees regime for the twelve months to 30 June Confirm continuance of the default licensing fees regime Review the default licensing fees regime after a suitable period of time has elapsed following the implementation of the Local Alcohol Policy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Animal Management Licensing & Regulatory Compliance |
Report on Animal Management activities for the year ending August/Sept 2021as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996 |
Note: that the Animal Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 and staff will provide the 2020/2021 report to the Secretary of Local Government
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boarding Houses Inspection Licensing and Compliance Services |
Update on the Auckland proactive boarding houses inspections programme. Increase inspections from one to a minimum of three per month focusing on high risk boarding houses identified from complaint data.
|
Update: report to Regulatory Committee and the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Animal management Bylaw Review Community and Social Policy |
This Bylaw promotes responsible animal ownership, including minimising impact on neighbours, the public and preventing damage.
|
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a statement of proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Progress to Date: Findings
Report 17 March 2020 Options Report 17 November 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction Bylaw 2015 Community and Social Policy |
Bylaw relates to construction activity on or near public places or infrastructure. This Bylaw will expire on 29 October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap. |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property Maintenance Nuisance Bylaw Review Community and Social Policy |
This Bylaw requires private property to be maintained well enough that doesn't create a nuisance or risk health and safety. Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002. |
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Progress to Date: Review
and Findings Report 1 September 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signage Bylaw Review Community and Social Policy |
This is a joint bylaw with Auckland Transport that regulates promotional signs to ensure public safety and prevent nuisance from poorly maintained or located signage. |
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Progress to Date: Findings
Report 23 June 2020 Options report 13 October 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Healthy Waters / Community and Social Policy |
The primary purpose of the Bylaw is to regulate land drainage including to protect, manage and maintain an efficient and effective public stormwater network, as well as the ensure the maintenance and operation of private stormwater systems. |
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Progress to Date: Findings
Reports 28 July 2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading and Events Bylaw Review Community and Social Policy |
This Bylaw regulates businesses and events that use public spaces to make sure everyone can use them fairly and safely. This Bylaw expires on 22 February 2022 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap. |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel. Progress to Date: Findings Report 13 October 2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Traffic Bylaw Review Community and Social Policy |
This Bylaw regulates the use of vehicles on council-controlled land that is not part of the Auckland transport system, like parks and beaches. This Bylaw expires on 25 June 2022 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap. |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
Updated to commence January 2022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015 Watercare |
This bylaw protects Auckland’s water sources, water supply and wastewater networks from damage, misuse and interference. This Bylaw will expire on 25 June 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still need and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel. Progress to Date: May 2020, due to COVID19 findings report went to Emergency Committee Findings
Report 28 May 2020-Emergency Committee Review
Options 23 June 2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wharves Bylaw 2015 Community and Social Policy |
Bylaw relates to use of council-controlled wharves. This Bylaw will expire on 29 October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap. |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resource Consents Appeal Update
Resource Consents |
To provide oversight of the appeals received to resource consent decisions. |
Information purposes Monthly report |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Regulatory Services Directorate
Director Regulatory Services |
Report on: · progress implementing the Food Act 2014 · insights into the performance, opportunities and risk of the Resources Consents Dept · progress implementing the Regulatory Compliance programme · transformation activity update · building consents and control · resource consents and regulatory engineering |
For information only: 6 monthly updates
Progress to Date: Provide the Regulatory Committee with an overview and an update on performance, opportunities and risks of Regulatory Services 17
November 2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Completed
Lead Department |
Area of work |
Committee role (decision and/or direction) |
Decision |
Community & Social Policy |
Alcohol Control Bylaw review This Bylaw provides the structure for creating alcohol bans. Individual boards use it to make decisions about local bans. Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002. |
Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the Governing Body to amend bylaw. Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public feedback and local board input. Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in February 2020.
|
Finding
Report 11 April 2019 Options
Report 9 May 2019 Recommendation for Statement of Proposal
1 September 2020 Adopt Statement of Proposal –
Governing Body 29 October 2020 |
Licensing & Regulatory Compliance |
Animal Management Report on Animal Management activities for the year ending August/Sept 2020 as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996 |
Note: that the Animal Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 and staff will provide the 2019/2020 report to the Secretary of Local Government
|
Adopt the 2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report |
Community and Social Policy |
Bylaw Review 2020-22 initiation Initiation of new bylaw reviews. Includes ‘Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws - Agreed Principles and Processes 2019’ Council has a statutory obligation to periodically review its bylaws. |
Decision on the initiation of bylaw reviews that must be completed by October 2022. Report will for each bylaw: · set out scope · legislative constraints/enablers (if any) · relevance to LBs · proposed process (including LB involvement) · key timeframes · public consultation approach whether a joint working group for early bylaw/policy development is proposed and initiate appointment process if necessary.
|
Initiation Report 18 February 2020
|
Community and Social Policy |
Cemeteries Bylaw Review (Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014) This Bylaw and code of practice protects health and safety and minimises potential offensive behaviour. Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002. |
Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the Governing Body to amend bylaw. Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public feedback and local board input. Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in February 2020. |
Options
Report 9 April 2019 Direction
Report 9 May 2019 Proposal
to amend 1 September 2020 Adopt
Statement of Proposal – Governing Body 24 September 2020
|
Building Consents |
Earthquake Prone, Dangerous & Insanitary Buildings Policy 2011 -2016 Review 2011 - Auckland Council was required under s131 of the Building Act 2004 to adopt a policy on earthquake prone, dangerous and insanitary buildings 2018 – Due to the Building (Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016, Auckland Council’s management of earthquake-prone buildings now falls under the national policy and methodology set by MBIE. Our ongoing work programme for issuing statutory EPB notices, receiving seismic assessments, and identifying residual potential EPBs is being carried out on this basis. Note that dangerous and insanitary buildings continue to have their own local policy that is now under the management of Regulatory Compliance. |
Update: on the progress made in implementing Auckland Council’s regulatory obligations with regard to earthquake-prone buildings within its jurisdiction. |
Approve
submission 28 July 2020
|
Community and Social Policy |
Food Bylaw Review
|
Appoint Bylaw Panel Decision on bylaw - Due to COVID19 the decision went to the Governing Body |
Adoption
30 April 2020
|
Community and Social Policy |
Freedom Camping This Bylaw replaces legacy requirements to manage freedom camping in vehicles, under the Freedom Camping Act. The legacy bylaws expiry on 29 October 2022. |
Decision on options to progress a council approach for a Statement of Proposal on freedom camping in vehicles.
|
Deferred to Governing Body |
Community and Social Policy |
Gambling Policy Reviews The Gambling Act 2003 and the Racing Act 2003 (the Acts) regulate gambling in New Zealand. The Acts require the policies to be reviewed every three years. Auckland Council (Council) first adopted these policies in 2013. Council reviewed them in 2017, found they were generally effective and retained both with no changes. Council reviewed in 2020, retain both with no changes.
|
Decision: start of the Class 4 Gambling (pokie) Venue Policy and the Racing Board (TAB) Venue Policy reviews in 2020 |
start policy
reviews 17 March 2020 findings review 13 October 2020 |
Community and Social Policy |
Navigation Safety Bylaw Review This Bylaw sets out the rules for all vessels and people using Auckland's waters to ensure their safety. Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002. |
Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw (findings and options reports). |
Progress to Date: Findings
Report 17 March 2020 Options
Report 23 June 2020 Recommend statement of proposal 13 October 2020 Adopt
statement of proposal – Governing Body – 29 October 2020 |
Community and Social Policy |
Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw Review This Bylaw applies to a range of outdoor fire activities, including outdoor cooking and heating fires, sky lanterns, traditional cooking fires, open air fires and incinerator fires. This Bylaw expires on 18 December 2021 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap. Findings resulted in decision to revoke bylaw |
Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw (findings and options reports).
|
Findings
and Options Report 13 October 2020 Review
findings – Governing Body – 29 October 2020
|
Democracy Services |
The Regulatory Committee Policy The Policy incorporates the operational policy and sub delegations for the decision-making responsibilities that lie within the areas of the committee’s responsibilities. Review District Licensing Committee (DLC) and Independent Resource Management Act (RMA) commissioner pools.
|
Decision: adopt the updated Regulatory Committee Policy Decision: approve the appointment of the District Licensing Committee and the selection process and appointments of independent resource management commissioners for 2021 to 2024. |
Progress to Date: Recruitment
process for DLC Commissioners 12 November 2019
– Governing Body 30 April
2020, due to COVID19 appointment of District Licensing Committee went go to
Emergency Committee Appointment
of DLC Committee 30 April 2020 Approval
to commence recruitment RMA Commissioners 23 June 2020 Adoption of the Regulatory Committee policy 28 July 2020 Recommendation for the appointment of independent
hearings commissioners
|
16 February 2021 |
|
Objection to stormwater works at 88 Calliope Road, Stanley Point
File No.: CP2020/18673
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To hear and determine an objection to proposed stormwater works at 88 Calliope Road, Stanley Point, pursuant to section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The properties at 90 and 92 Calliope Road and 17, 17A and 19 Rutland Road in Stanley Point are subject to serious flooding.
3. The existing stormwater network is in poor condition, undersized and needs to be replaced to mitigate future flooding of these and other properties.
4. The proposed stormwater works (detailed in Attachment A) comprise the construction of a new stormwater pipe beneath seven properties, from Calliope Road to Rutland Road.
5. A resource consent for the project was granted on 4 September 2019.
6. Auckland Council’s design consultants have analysed four options (see Attachment B):
· option A: upgrading the pipe along the existing alignment
· option B: realigning the stormwater network along Calliope Road, down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road, along the rear of 17A Rutland Road and upgrade the downstream network
· option C: realigning the stormwater network along Calliope Road and down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road through to Rutland Road
· option D: realigning the stormwater network along Calliope Road, down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road, along the front of 17A Rutland Road and upgrade the downstream network.
7. Option B has been selected as the preferred option based on several site constraints and design considerations including:
· the density of existing development limiting access and working space for machinery and construction personnel
· the risk of damage to existing foundations, houses and other structures during construction due to close proximity of the new pipe
· potential clashes with existing stormwater pipes (both public and private)
· potential clashes with other utility services, retaining walls and trees
· cost and practicability relating to constructing the new pipe on the same alignment as the old pipe.
8. Most of the new pipes will be installed by horizonal directional drilling, which is a trenchless methodology designed to minimise disruption caused by construction.
9. Consultation has been undertaken with all affected property owners and occupiers throughout the project.
10. Formal notification was served on all affected property owners and occupiers under section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002 on 21 January 2020 (see Attachment C).
11. The owner of 88 Calliope Road (the Landowner) subsequently lodged an objection despite previously indicating acceptance via email dated 18 December 2019.
12. The basis of the objection is a preference for the existing alignment and concerns that drilling beneath the driveway and construction traffic using the driveway to access other constructions areas may cause ground settlement, accelerated ageing of the driveway and damage to existing retaining walls.
13. Auckland Council staff met with the Landowner on 12 March 2020 but failed to resolve the Landowner’s concerns.
14. If the Regulatory Committee determines that the works should proceed, construction will begin sometime between October and December 2021. The works will take approximately five to six months to complete.
15. It has been explained to all the affected property owners that they have the right to claim injurious affection (if established) under the Public Works Act 1981.
Recommendations That the Regulatory Committee: a) hear and determine the objection by the owners of 88 Calliope Road according to clause 1(e) of Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002 b) resolve that the council may proceed with the proposed stormwater works (as shown in Attachment A), according to clause 1(e) of Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.
|
Horopaki
Context
16. Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department is responsible for managing and maintaining the public stormwater network in Auckland, much of which is located on private land.
17. Section 181(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 empowers the council to ‘construct works on or under private land or under a building on private land that it considers necessary for sewage and stormwater drainage’.
18. Such works require either the prior written consent of the owner of the land, or that the council follows the process set out in Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.
19. Schedule 12 requires that affected owners and occupiers are provided with a description of the proposed works, including plans, and are given the opportunity to object to the works within one month of notification.
20. If an objection is made, a hearing must be arranged. After hearing objections, the council must then determine to either abandon the works proposed, or proceed with the works proposed, with or without any alterations that the council thinks fit.
Calliope Road stormwater upgrade project
21. Properties at 90 and 92 Calliope Road and 17, 17A and 19 Rutland Road in Stanley Point have experienced serious flooding on several occasions.
22. The existing stormwater network is in poor condition, undersized and needs to be replaced to mitigate future flooding of these and other properties.
23. The proposed stormwater works were granted resource consent on 4 September 2019 and comprise the construction of a new stormwater pipe beneath seven properties, from Calliope Road to Rutland Road (see Attachment A).
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
24. The council is empowered to construct works on private land that it considers necessary for stormwater drainage. When determining the best option, the council looks at a range of possible options to achieve the required stormwater outcomes for the public good, and at the same time, to carefully balance any impacts on individual property owners.
25. In the case of this project, the council’s design consultants assessed four options to address flooding and the renewal of ageing stormwater pipes from Calliope Road to Rutland Road. As outlined in Table 1 below, there are limited practical options available for this project (see Attachment B).
26. All the identified options have some potential impacts on private properties during construction.
27. The options considered are:
· option A: upgrade the pipe along the existing alignment
· option B: realigning the stormwater network along Calliope Road, down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road, along the rear of 17A Rutland Road and upgrade the downstream network (recommended option)
· option C: realign the stormwater network along Calliope Road and down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road through to Rutland Road
· option D: realign the stormwater network along Calliope Road, down the driveway of 86 Calliope Road and front side of 17A Rutland Road and upgrade the downstream network.
28. The four potential options were analysed against relevant criteria as shown in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Analysis of alignment options against key criteria
(White = most favourable; Green = OK; Amber = less favourable; Red = least favourable)
Criteria
|
Option A Upgrade along the existing alignment
|
Option B Realign along 88 - 86 Calliope Road along rear of 17A Rutland, down northern boundary of 17A & 17 Rutland road (preferred option) |
Option C Realign along 88 - 86 Calliope Road along southern boundary of 17 & 17A Rutland road
|
Option D Realign along 88 - 86 Calliope Road to front of 17A Rutland, down northern boundary of 17 Rutland
|
Significance |
Impact on existing structures |
Existing pipe close to foundations of 90 Calliope Road. Risk of damage to house. |
Acceptable clearance to existing structures. |
Proposed pipe near house and garage foundations at 15 Rutland Rd. Risk of damage to house and garage. |
Close proximity to garage foundations of 17A Rutland Road.
|
High |
Constructability risk |
Limited access to rear of 90 and 92 Calliope Road and pipe close to building foundations. |
Good space for machinery and temporary laydown areas. Constrained by existing services within Rutland Rd |
Good space for machinery and temporary laydown areas. Constrained by existing services within Rutland Rd |
Good space for machinery and temporary laydown areas. Constrained by existing services within Rutland Rd |
High |
Ability to connect to private infrastructure |
Restricts future connection options for 86A Calliope Road. |
Good connections for private infrastructure. |
Poor connections for existing private infrastructure. Requires additional infrastructure for connecting existing private connections. |
Good connections for private infrastructure but may require some rehabilitation of part of the existing network. |
High |
Access for future maintenance |
Limited access to rear of properties at 90 and 92 Calliope Road. |
Good access with the exception of the rear of properties at 90 and 92 Calliope Road. |
Restricted access to new manhole of 86A Calliope Road once developed. |
Restricted access to new manhole of 86A Calliope Road once developed. |
Medium |
Disruption to property owners |
Minor
|
Medium |
Medium |
Medium |
Medium |
Cost |
$$ |
$$ |
$$$
|
$$$
|
Medium |
Duplication of existing stormwater network |
10% |
20% |
80% |
20% |
Medium |
Impact on future development |
Minor - Pipe runs alongside property boundaries |
Minor – pipe would run along driveway of 88 Calliope along property boundary |
Minor - Pipe runs alongside property boundaries |
Minor - Pipe runs alongside property boundaries |
Medium |
Compliance with Stormwater Code of Practice |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Medium |
29. Option B is recommended as the preferred option based on several constraints and design considerations including:
· density of existing development limiting access and working space for machinery and construction personnel.
· risk of damage to existing foundations, houses and other structures during construction due to close proximity of the new pipe.
· location of existing stormwater pipes and private connections
· potential clashes with other utility services, retaining walls and trees.
· cost and practicability relating to constructing the new pipe on the same alignment as the old pipe.
30. Most of the new pipes will be installed by horizonal directional drilling, which is a trenchless method designed to minimise construction disruption.
31. All existing private connections will be reconnected to the new pipes by open trenching as a part of this project.
32. A resource consent was granted for the works on 4 September 2019.
Consultation process with the landowners
33. Consultation with affected property owners has been undertaken throughout the project and numerous meetings have been held with individual property owners to attempt to resolve their concerns.
34. Prior to notification, the Landowner raised concerns regarding the proposed pipeline alignment and the private stormwater connections. Following discussions with council staff, the Landowner indicated their approval for the scheme via email dated 18 December 2019. No further concerns were raised at that time.
35. Following notification on 21 January 2020, under section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Landowner lodged an objection.
Summary of objection received from 88 Calliope Road
36. The basis of the objection is a preference for the existing alignment and concerns that drilling beneath the driveway and construction traffic using the driveway may cause ground settlement, accelerated ageing of the driveway and damage to existing retaining walls. Noise and vibration concerns were also mentioned.
37. Auckland Council staff met with the Landowner at the property on 12 March 2020 to discuss the concerns raised. It was communicated to the Landowner that:
· the council’s design consultants investigated several potential alignments for the new stormwater pipe. Following consideration of multiple site constraints such as insufficient setback from dwellings, impacts on existing structures, location of lateral connections to the existing stormwater system, presence of utility services, trees, retaining walls etc. the proposed alignment was selected as the preferred option and was granted resource consent on 4 September 2019.
· the pipes would be installed by horizontal directional drilling to minimise impacts on private properties
· considering the condition of the driveway and the Landowner’s legitimate concerns around potential settlement and damage caused by construction traffic, the council would be willing to enter into an agreement with the Landowner to contribute to the cost of re-paving the existing driveway on completion of the works. While not explicitly discussed, this would be an ex-gratia payment that would be deducted from any future claim for injurious affection.
· the retaining walls, garden walls, large trees etc. have been considered in the design and the retaining walls were unlikely to be affected by the works.
· pre and post construction condition surveys of the property (including buildings and retaining walls) would be completed by an independent specialist. The surveys would include photographs, measurements and descriptive records. A copy of these reports would be provided to the property owner
· building monitoring of the property would be undertaken during construction. This would involve installing monitoring pins on the corners of the house and retaining wall. The monitoring pins would be regularly checked during construction to confirm if there was any movement.
· the contractor would take all practicable steps to avoid damage to the property and the maximum size of construction machinery entering the driveway would be restricted to five tonnes.
· noise and vibration levels would be monitored to be within the consented range, and this is not expected to have any adverse impacts on the buildings, property or structures.
· following the completion of works, reinstatement of all affected areas would be completed.
· if any damage was confirmed to be caused by the construction works, including to the owner’s driveway, the damage would be fully rectified by the council or the Landowner would be fully compensated for such damage.
· construction works are anticipated to commence in the last quarter of 2021. The work would take approximately five to six months to complete, and the work within 88 Calliope Road is anticipated to take between four and six weeks.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
38. Auckland Council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan on 21 July 2020. Some of the key elements of the plan include how we will adapt to climate change, taking a precautionary approach and preparing for our current emissions pathway and the prospect of a 3.5 degrees warmer region.
39. One of the expected consequences of rising global temperatures is increased and more intense rainfall. To contribute to increasing Auckland’s resilience to climate change, the Auckland Council Stormwater Code of Practice requires all new infrastructure to be designed to deal with these expected impacts and severe weather events.
40. The proposed pipe has been designed to cater for 10 percent annual exceedance probability (1 in 10-year average recurrence interval) storm events, including allowance for climate change. This has the effect of making the network more resilient to storm events and reducing the likelihood of flooding of properties.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
41. Engagement with Auckland Transport will take place as required to manage temporary traffic impacts during construction.
42. Approval has been obtained from Watercare to divert a watermain at Rutland Road during the construction period.
43. Once constructed, the new stormwater pipe will form part of the public stormwater network to be maintained by Healthy Waters.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
Local impacts
44. All property owners and occupiers directly affected by the proposed pipe installation have been consulted either in person or by email and informed about the project over several years.
45. Section 181 Local Government Act 2002 notices were served on all property owners and occupiers on 21 January 2020 (see Attachment C). The only property owner to lodge an objection to the notice was 88 Calliope Road.
46. As described above, the project will have some local impacts, such as temporary excavations and reinstatement work on some properties. These temporary impacts have all been carefully explained to the residents who are affected. Multiple meetings have been held on site with the individual property owners.
47. Resource consent has been granted for the project.
Local board views
48. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board has received ongoing project updates via the Healthy Waters’ quarterly status reports. No concerns have been raised by the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board regarding the project.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
49. The project was discussed with mana whenua groups during a Healthy Waters drop-in session held on 10 May 2019. No concerns were raised by iwi regarding the project and they were supportive of the project.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
50. The project has an approved business case, and a construction contract was awarded under delegated financial authority on 29 October 2019. As a result of the COVID-19 emergency budget, the contract was suspended prior to this objection being heard and any works being undertaken on site. The project will be funded from Healthy Waters’ capital budget subject to confirmation of the 2022 financial year budget.
51. It is proposed that construction will commence sometime between October and December 2021.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
52. Staff have undertaken a systematic risk assessment. Key risks and proposed mitigations relating to the endorsement of Option B are shown in Table 2 below:
Table 2. Risks and mitigations of Option B: realign the stormwater network along Calliope Road, down the driveway of 86 - 88 Calliope Road, along the rear of 17A Rutland Road and upgrade the downstream network
Risk |
Likelihood and consequence |
Mitigation |
Financial risk If the Landowner appeals the Regulatory Committee’s decision, the council may become liable for the cost of defending a District Court case. |
Likelihood: Low Consequence: Medium |
Given that the Regulatory Committee and District Court’s decision-making discretion is limited only to questions of the works being necessary and compliance with legal process, and not matters of compensation, it is considered unlikely that an appeal would be brought. Even if it was, the risk of the council losing on appeal is considered low, due to the works being necessary, and the section 181 process being followed correctly. If the Landowner is unsuccessful in any legal challenge, they may be liable to pay court costs. |
The Landowner could seek injurious affection (if evidenced) through the Land Valuation Tribunal, arguing that the public works have reduced the value of their property. |
Likelihood: Low Consequence: Medium
|
The potential for an injurious affection claim is considered low in this case for the following reasons: · the proposed works do not involve the taking of any land. · the area affected by the works is a concrete driveway alongside the property boundary which has inherent limitations on future development. · the works will reduce the risk of future asset failure and associated risk of damage to the property. |
Construction risk – likelihood of damage being caused to property |
Likelihood: Low Consequence: Medium |
The works will be undertaken by an approved council contractor who will hold $5 million public liability insurance. |
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
53. If the Regulatory Committee determines to proceed with the project (under Schedule 12 clause 1(e)(ii)), the next step will be to notify the Landowner in writing of the council’s intention to proceed with the works. The work is proposed to be undertaken in the last quarter of 2021.
54. The Landowner has up to 14 days to lodge a further appeal to the District Court. If this occurs, then the council’s Legal Services team will support this process. If no appeal is lodged, the council would look to proceed with the works in late 2021.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Engineering plans |
191 |
b⇩ |
Alignment options |
197 |
c⇩ |
Local Government Act notification |
199 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Authors |
Emma Cowie - Relationship Advisor Ian Wallace - Healthy Waters |
Authorisers |
Craig Mcilroy - General Manager Healthy Waters Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services |