I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Howick Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Monday, 19 April 2021

6.00pm

Howick Local Board Meeting Room
Pakuranga Library Complex
7 Aylesbury Street
Pakuranga

 

Howick Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Adele White

 

Deputy Chairperson

John Spiller

 

Members

Katrina Bungard

 

 

Bo Burns

 

 

David Collings

 

 

Bruce Kendall

 

 

Mike Turinsky

 

 

Bob Wichman

 

 

Peter Young, JP

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Vanessa Phillips

Democracy Advisor

 

14 April 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 021 891 378

Email: vanessa.phillips@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Highland Park Community House update to the Howick Local Board          5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                    7

12        Governing Body Member update                                                                                 9

13        Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme 2021                       11

14        Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme                                                     25

15        Public feedback on proposal to make new navigation rules                                  31

16        Highbrook Park Trust Disestablishment                                                                   39

17        Review of the Code of Conduct - draft revised code                                               47

18        Statement of proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw and controls  53

19        Proposal to make a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw                                   67

20        Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund 2020/2021                                      73

21        Auckland Council’s Performance Report: Howick Local Board for November 2020 to February 2021                                                                                                               77

22        Draft Statement of Expectations for Council-controlled Organisations               91

23        Approval for seven new road names for Stages 14, 15A and 15B at the Donegal Glen development in Flat Bush                                                                                105

24        Approval to rename five new roads in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush                                                                                                                     117

25        Proposal to amend the 2019-2022 Howick Local Board meeting schedule        125

26        Workshop records                                                                                                     151

27        Governance forward work calendar                                                                        161

28        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 Howick Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 15 March 2021, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Howick 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       Highland Park Community House update to the Howick Local Board

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Jennie McCormick, House Manager of the Highland Park Community House will be in attendance to present to the Board an annual update of the House’s activities and highlights

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the deputation from the Highland Park Community House and thank them for their attendance.

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

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

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2021/00013

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       This item gives the local board chairperson an opportunity to update the local board on any announcements and note the chairperson’s written report.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing the local board chairperson with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the chairperson’s verbal update and written report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Governing Body Member update

File No.: CP2021/00026

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Howick Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the local board on regional matters.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing the Howick Ward Councillors with an opportunity to update the local board on regional matters they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal reports from Cr Paul Young and Cr Sharon Stewart QSM.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme 2021

File No.: CP2021/03775

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To outline the outcomes of the proposed Regional Land Transport Programme (RLTP) in the local board area and provide an opportunity for the board to resolve feedback for the attention of the Governing Body and the Regional Transport Committee.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report covers:

·   a summary of what the RLTP is and the process of its development

·   a summary of what projects and programmes are planned for the local board area.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Programme report

b)      provide feedback on the Regional Land Transport Programme as per Attachment A to this report.

 

Horopaki

Context

3.       The RLTP is a 10-year investment programme for transport in Auckland. It includes the activities of Auckland Transport (AT), Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) and KiwiRail.

4.       It is reviewed and publicly consulted on every three years in a process led by the Auckland Regional Transport Committee (RTC).

5.       The RTC is comprised of members of the AT Board and representatives from Waka Kotahi and KiwiRail. During the review process the RTC seeks the views of Auckland’s elected representatives through the Governing Body. The AT Board is responsible for the final approving of the RLTP.

6.       The RLTP is the end product of a number of different local and central government processes and plans:

·   Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP)

·   The Auckland Plan 2050

·   Auckland Council’s Long-term Plan (LTP)

·   National Land Transport Programme (NLTP)

·   Government Policy Statement on Land Transport (GPS).

7.       It is worth noting that AT is not a party to ATAP discussions but that the direction expressed in this document is a key driver for outcomes in the RLTP. Likewise, the LTP sets funding levels for key programmes in the RLTP, such as the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

8.       The current transport programme is set out in the 2018 RLTP. This saw the introduction of the Regional Fuel Tax (RFT), that provided an additional $1.5 billion of direct revenue over 10 years. Including the RFT, the 2018 RLTP anticipated a $10 billion capital programme over ten years.

9.       While the 2018 RLTP programme provided a sound investment base there have been an increasing number of challenges requiring attention in the 2021 RLTP. These include:

·   the impact of growth and other demands creating a need for increased investment in upgrading existing infrastructure and for new investment to support growth

·   a need for increased investment to ensure transport plays its role in meeting overall greenhouse gas reduction targets

·   continuing to invest in public transport and to accelerate cycling network completion to support mode change

·   a need to deliver further investment to support vision zero goals to provide reductions in deaths and serious injuries

·   an increasing need for more responsive investment in the transport network at a local level.

10.     Unfortunately, the response to these challenges is tempered by the impact of the council’s Emergency Budget, the effect of COVID-19 on public transport fares (leading to reduced operational funding for AT), and a strong likelihood that Waka Kotahi funding will not reach previously assumed levels.

11.     It has been assessed that about 95 per cent of the available funding from the council and Government is needed to run the transport system, maintain the quality of the system (renewals and maintenance) and deliver committed/contracted /under construction projects. This means that there is very little headroom for new investment and that there will be hard trade-offs, including the deferring of many important projects. 

12.     At its meeting on 11 March 2021 the Planning Committee unanimously endorsed the draft RLTP. The ATAP was released on 12 March 2021. The RTC formally approved the draft RLTP for public consultation at its meeting on 23 March 2021.

13.     The current timeline for development of the RLTP is as follows.

Table One: RLTP development timeline

Date

Action

23 March

RTC considers draft RLTP for public consultation

29 March-2 May

Proposed dates for public consultation

May

Evaluation of public consultation

27 May

RTC review final draft RLTP

3 June

Governing Body review RLTP for endorsement

June

AT Board reviews RLTP for final approval

01 July

RLTP operational

14.     As a regional programme it is appropriate that the primary engagement focus sits with the Governing Body through the Planning Committee.

15.     However, as the RLTP has important local impacts AT recognizes the importance of seeking local board views to ensure these are included in the information given to the RTC and Governing Body to inform their decision making. To this end, AT has the following engagement planned.

Table Two: Auckland Transport engagement plan with local boards

Date

Local board Engagement

15 February

AT attended the Chairs Forum to give an overview on the RLTP process, to outline how the RLTP is put together and finally what the process is for LB input.

29 March – 2 May

Workshops with all local boards to discuss the RLTP.

4 – 18 May

AT will write reports for local boards to pass resolutions to officially record their feedback on the RLTP.

3 June

Local boards could use their statutory input item at a Governing Body Meeting (Planning Committee) to give their views on the RLTP.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.    The draft Long-term Plan proposal is to reinstate the Local Board Transport Capital fund back up to $20 million per annum for the next ten years. On this basis the proposed RLTP includes $200 million for local board initiatives. However, it should be noted that this is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5 per cent.

17.    The below tables summarises projects that are planned to be delivered in the local board area and surrounding areas and could be of benefit to residents from Howick Local Board area.

Table Three: Auckland Transport planned projects and their delivery

#

AT Projects

Duration

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

31

Meadowbank Kohimarama Connectivity Project

2021/2022 - 2023/2024

22.1

32

Tamaki Regeneration

2022/2023 - 2030/2031

40.9

33

Eastern Busway

2021/2022 - 2025/2026

873.9

34

Sylvia Park Bus Improvements

2024/2025 - 2026/2027

19.9

40

Smales Allens Road Widening and Intersection Upgrade

2025/2026 - 2027/2028

23.4

43

Airport to Botany Stage 2 Bus Improvements

2023/2024 - 2025/2026

30.1

44

Ormiston Town Centre Link

2021/2022 - 2022/2023

16.8

18.    The below tables summarises projects within larger programmes, that are planned to be delivered in the local board area and surrounding areas and could be of benefit to residents from the Howick Local Board area.

Table Four: Projects within larger programmes

#

Project from a Programme

Underlying Programme

23

Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive Shared Path and Links to Glen Innes

Urban Cycleways (AT)

29

Ellerslie-Panmure Highway & Pakuranga Road corridors

Connected Communities (AT)

32

Tamaki Spatial Priority Area

Projects Supporting Auckland Housing Programme (AT)

35

Mount Wellington Highway/SH1 Southbound Onramp

Network Performance / Optimisation

42

East Tamaki Road/Ormiston Road/Preston Road

Network Performance (AT)

69

Atkinson Avenue

Safety (AT)

19.     The below table summarises projects being delivered by Waka Kotahi that are planned to be delivered in the local board area and surrounding areas and could be of benefit to residents from the Howick Local Board area.

Table Five: Planned projects delivered by Waka Kotahi

 

Non-AT Projects

Responsible Agency

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

28

Glen Innes to Tamaki Cycleway

(joint project with AT)

Waka Kotahi

49.0

41

Wiri to Quay Park

KiwiRail

209.0

46

Mill Road Corridor

Waka Kotahi

1354.0

 


 

20.    The below map corresponds to the above tables and shows the location of the projects.

Figure One: Location of the planned projects within the Howick Local Board area and surrounding local board areas

21.    The below table outlines objectives from the Howick Local Board Plan 2020 that are approached in the RLTP.

Table Six: Howick Local Board Plan 2020 objectives and RLTP outcomes

Objectives

RLTP outcomes

Public transport services that people can easily access.

The rapid transit network (RTN) is a key investment priority and forms the largest category of capital investment in this RLTP. The proposed transport programme in this RLTP will deliver a step-change in the coverage and performance of the RTN over the next 10 years. This RLTP will also see the RTN continue to diversify away from the City Centre.

The RLTP includes $874 million for the Eastern Busway, providing a new rapid transit connection from Panmure to Pakuranga and Botany. This includes the Reeves Road flyover, and new bus interchanges at Pakuranga and Botany. This project will improve travel choices by making public transport, walking and cycling realistic and safe options, and improve connections within the area and to the rest of Auckland.

The Eastern Busway is expected to carry more than 30,000 people per day between the rapidly growing south-eastern suburbs and the rail network in Panmure. This project will make journeys faster and more convenient, reducing travel time between Botany and Britomart. It will also help reduce traffic congestion and vehicle emissions.

It also includes $30 million for the Airport to Botany project (A2B). This rapid transit programme will improve travel choices and journey times for people in south and east Auckland. Stage one of this project has delivered a new bus-rail interchange at Puhinui, bus and transit lanes between Manukau and the Auckland Airport precinct, and a new high frequency electric AirportLink bus.

The next stages to be delivered under this RLTP involve protecting the future A2B rapid transit corridor, between Auckland Airport and Botany via Manukau, and extending the new AirportLink bus to Botany via Te Irirangi Drive. Extending the AirportLink bus to Botany will be supported by bus interchanges and priority improvements along Te Irirangi Drive, with a move toward a rapid transit corridor in future decades.

Active transport infrastructure enables connection with schools, key community facilities and transport hubs

Over $300 million is allocated to delivering AT’s On-going Cycling Programme, which is intended to follow the completion of the Urban Cycleways Programme early in the RLTP period. This is in addition to the allocation to cycling included in the Connected Communities programme. This programme is expected to deliver 200km of new and upgraded cycleways and shared paths across the region by 2031, the majority of which is included as part of the strategic cycling network. Between 100km-125 km of new cycleways will be generated from AT, 15 km from Auckland Council and 59 km from Waka Kotahi. Some existing cycle lanes will also be retrofitted with appropriate safety barriers.

There is also:

·   $49 million to continue delivering new footpaths in high priority locations

·   a new $30 million programme for minor improvements for cycling and micromobility. A key element of this package will be delivering ‘pop up cycleways’ which will retrofit a range of existing painted cycle lanes with appropriate safety barriers. This programme will also address other issues on the existing cycling network to improve useability and enhance safety.

·   ongoing funding for a programme of tactical urbanism initiatives such as those brought to life through Waka Kotahi’s Innovating Streets Programme.

Our road network is safe, well maintained and fit for purpose.

A ten-year investment of $3.93 billion has been included in this RLTP to cover the cost of renewing AT’s asset base. This RLTP has $900 million more in AT renewals than the $3.05 billion included in the 2018 RLTP.

Our road network enables local economic prosperity.

The RLTP includes:

·   $23 million for the Smales Allens Road widening and intersection upgrade

·   $1354 million for the Mill Road Corridor (funded through the NZUP).

Local boards have transport infrastructure funding available for local area improvements that don’t meet regional priorities.

This RLTP includes a $200 million Local Board Initiatives fund to be split between Auckland’s 21 local boards, and provide for an ongoing programme of smaller-scale local transport improvements.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     The approach set out in the RLTP conforms with the direction expressed by the council through the Long-term Plan. However, AT notes that far more needs to be done to reach the Auckland Council climate change emissions targets.

23.     This investment programme is only one of a comprehensive set of measures needed to reduce transport emissions. The RLTP does not exist to set government policy and additional measures are needed that are beyond its scope to implement. A comprehensive approach to emission reduction will therefore require a range of actions from across government and industry sector.

24.     In the context of this challenge, Auckland needs a Climate Plan for its transport system which sets out the preferred pathway to meeting Auckland Councils emissions targets. This plan, along with a Climate Change Programme Business Case will be developed as part of this RLTP.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25.     The RLTP is the product of several Auckland Council processes and plans including:

·   Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP)

·   The Auckland Plan 2050

·   Auckland Council’s Long-Term Plan (LTP).

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

Local impacts and local board views

26.    Auckland Transport has used local board plans to inform the development of the RLTP.

27.    Opportunities for local boards to engage on the RLTP have included:

·   Chair’s Forum on 15 February 2021

·   A workshop with the Howick Local Board on 1 April 2021

·   Highlighting the opportunities for local board feedback to the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     Iwi and mataawaka have been engaged through AT’s Maori engagement team.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29.     The are no direct financial implications for the local board in receiving this report.

30.     Local board feedback on the RLTP and any changes made as a result of that feedback could have financial implications depending on that feedback. Further information about AT’s priorities for funding and implications of changes to funding levels can be found on page 80 of the RLTP consultation document.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     Auckland Transport’s capital programme within the RLTP is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5 per cent. If this is not adopted there will be significant impacts on plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Once the local boards have resolved their feedback on the RLTP, AT will review all feedback from local boards and the public. This feedback, and any proposed changes, will be compiled into a feedback report for the consideration of the Governing Body and the Regional Transport Committee. 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

RLTP Local Board Feedback template

19

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas – Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Hamish Bunn – General Manager, Investment, Planning & Policy, Auckland Transport

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme

File No.: CP2021/03740

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the draft proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) scheme for Auckland, established in 2018, is a key funding source for investment in Auckland’s transport network. The scheme is projected to generate $1.5 billion of revenue and enables over $4 billion of additional investment.

3.       Decisions by central government to invest directly in RFT projects and current reviews of the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP) indicative package and the draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) have necessitated a variation to the RFT scheme.

4.       There is no proposal to alter the level of the RFT, the period for which the scheme runs, or the area covered by the tax.

5.       Decisions around the overall investment programme for transport and the funding of this are made through the ATAP and RLTP processes. The allocation of projects within the RLTP to the RFT programme is a key step to support implementation.

6.       The draft proposal to vary the RFT scheme (refer Attachment A) retains the 14 projects identified in the original programme but updates the specific initiatives within these projects, along with cost and timing projections.

7.       The draft proposal went out for public consultation alongside the draft RLTP. Following consideration of feedback from local boards and from the general public, a final proposal will be endorsed by the Governing Body and sent to the relevant ministers for approval and enactment through Order in Council.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the report on proposed variations to the 2018 Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

b)      provide feedback on the proposed variation to the 2018 Regional Fuel Tax scheme.

 

Horopaki

Context

The creation of Auckland’s RFT scheme

8.       Work on an aligned strategic approach to transport in Auckland (ATAP) began in 2016. This work made clear that the level of investment needed was not achievable with the existing funding mechanisms.

9.       A regional fuel tax was proposed as a tool to achieve a higher level of investment for Auckland. With the leverage that this funding could drive from government subsidies and development contributions, the RFT enabled $4 billion of investment that would not otherwise occur.

10.     Without this investment, a number of the positive outcomes of the programme would not be able to be achieved, including improved road safety, increased availability and use of public transport, more active transport options, improved access to employment, and more growth and housing development.

11.     An amendment to the Land Transport Management Act 2003 (LTMA) was passed in 2018 which provided for the introduction of regional fuel taxes by order in council.

12.     Auckland Council consulted with Aucklanders on the introduction of an RFT as part of its 10-year Budget 2018-2028 consultation in February/March 2018. Following this, a detailed proposal for an RFT scheme was prepared, consulted on from 1-14 May 2018, and then approved for submission to the government.

13.     The proposed scheme was approved by the government and become operative from 1 July 2018 (refer Attachment B).

Details of the existing scheme

14.     Auckland’s RFT scheme collects 10c per litre (plus GST) and applies to sales of petrol and diesel by retailers within the boundaries of Auckland Council (excluding Aotea Great Barrier Island) from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2028.

15.     Revenue from the scheme is projected to be $150 million per annum, a total of $1.5 billion across the 10 years.

16.     The original proposal also details:

·   the key objectives of the scheme

·   the effects of the scheme (positive and negative)

·   how it aligned with the relevant strategic documents

·   why it should be a funding source (including other options considered)

·   reasoning for the exclusion of Aotea Great Barrier Island

·   the information and assumptions that support the forecast revenue calculations.

17.     The programme funded 14 categories of expenditure referred to in the scheme as projects:

·   bus priority improvements

·   city centre bus infrastructure

·   improving airport access

·   Eastern Busway (formerly AMETI)

·   park and rides

·   electric trains and stabling

·   ferry network improvements (was downtown ferry redevelopment)

·   road safety

·   active transport

·   Penlink

·   Mill Road corridor

·   road corridor improvements

·   network capacity and performance improvements

·   growth-related transport infrastructure.

Progress of the scheme to 31 December 2020

18.     Since the RFT was introduced, $376 million of revenue has been received by Auckland Council. Auckland Transport has spent $346 million on designated projects which was funded by $162 million of RFT, $135 million of Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency subsidies, and $49 million of development contributions.

19.     The programme was always planned to ramp up over the 10 years, reflecting the need to complete projects that were already in train in 2018, and to gear up to a much higher level of delivery. Unspent funds at any stage in the programme are held in reserve. This reserve totalled $197 million as at 31 December 2020.

20.     Key achievements of the scheme so far include:

·   improving road safety through the introduction of lower speed limits on 600 Auckland roads to reduce harm and loss of life

·   installing red-light running enforcement and CCTV cameras

·   improving airport access through works on the Puhinui Station with construction now underway on the new interchange

·   improving the Downtown Ferry terminal with the completion of breakwater piling and Pontoon 5 and Landing Pontoon 2 now at the commissioning stage to increase capacity and customer experience.

Subsequent government funding announcements

21.     Two key announcements by central government have reduced the requirement for Regional Fuel Tax funding for some of the projects included in the scheme.

22.     On 29 January 2020, the government announced the New Zealand Upgrade Programme (NZUP). This programme included direct crown investment of $3.48 billion in transport infrastructure for Auckland.

23.     The NZUP provided funding for two projects included in the RFT scheme. The Penlink project was allocated $411 million and the Mill Road project was allocated $1.354 billion. Following this, the responsibility for the delivery of these two projects was transferred to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency.

24.     As part of its fiscal stimulus package to support the economy in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the government announced a programme on 1 April 2020 to fund ‘shovel ready’ infrastructure projects.

25.     Following applications by the Auckland Council group, a number of projects were contracted to receive funding. Two of the successful projects constituted part of wider RFT projects.

26.     Funding was received towards the Downtown Ferry Terminal which is a part of the ferry network improvements RFT project.

27.     Funding was also received to support the Puhinui Bus/Rail Interchange project which forms a part of the Improving Airport Access RFT project.

28.     Staff consider that this, along with the current reviews of ATAP and the draft RLTP (summarised below), constitute a change to a material aspect of the programme of capital projects supported by the RFT as enacted in 2018.

ATAP update and draft RLTP preparation

29.     Auckland Council and Auckland Transport have been working with central government partners to update the ATAP. The development of an ATAP indicative package will inform and guide Auckland’s RLTP and the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP).

30.     Despite additional funding available to the programme through direct government investment, the ATAP budget is still highly constrained. This is the result of increased demands for transport investment in Auckland as well as updated costings and information around existing projects. Funding of the ATAP indicative package is reliant on the continuation of the RFT scheme.

31.     Staff consider that this, along with the recent central government funding decisions (summarised above) constitute a change to a material aspect of the capital projects programmes supported by the RFT as enacted in 2018.

32.     Given these material changes, staff have prepared a formal proposal to vary the scheme, as required by section 65G(1) of the LTMA 2003. This draft variation proposal formed the basis for public consultation which is required under section 65H(c) of the LTMA.

33.     Following consultation, the Governing Body will consider feedback (including that from local boards) and then submit the proposal (with any changes made) to the Ministers of Finance and Transport, who will then decide whether to accept it (sections 65I and 65J of the LTMA). If the Ministers do accept the proposal, they will send it on to the Governor-General to enact through an Order in Council (sections 65J and 65K of the LTMA).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Proposed variation to the scheme

34.     Given the changes discussed above (government funding and ATAP update) and the fact that local board views were captured for the original 2018 scheme, the council seeks local board views on the proposed variation. 

35.     The proposed variation of the scheme is led by the work on the updated ATAP indicative package and the draft RLTP.

36.     It is not proposed that there is any change to:

·   the rate of the RFT

·   the period of the scheme

·   the area subject to the scheme.

37.     Despite the fact that the scheme does not run to the end of the new 10-year budget, it is not proposed that the council looks to extend the scheme. This is primarily because work continues on the Congestion Question project which is investigating different road pricing options that could replace the RFT in the future.

38.     It is proposed that the scheme maintains the same 14 projects (with the special consideration of Penlink and Mill Road staying in the scheme without additional allocation of RFT due to a change in delivery and funding management) but that changes are made to:

·   the descriptions of projects, identified initiatives within them, and projected benefits, to reflect any changes in scope

·   the level of projected total expenditure and indicative RFT contribution to each project to reflect where new funding has become available or where project costings have been updated

·   the timing of projects following decisions made through the development of the draft RLTP

·   the naming of one project where it is proposed that Downtown Ferry Redevelopment is renamed Ferry Network Improvements to reflect the incorporation of initiatives to purchase new electric ferries to help decarbonise the public transport fleet.

39.     It has been assessed that these changes constitute a change to a material aspect of the programme of capital projects supported by the RFT scheme and therefore, the council must prepare a proposal to vary the scheme, pursuant to section 65G(1)(a) of the LTMA.

Consultation

40.     Public consultation on the draft proposal to vary the RFT scheme is occurring alongside the Auckland Transport consultation on the draft RLTP.

41.     This consultation takes place from 29 March to 2 May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

42.     The proposal to vary the RFT scheme constitutes a change in an allocation of funding within the overall ATAP indicative package and RLTP. Transport projects funded include climate change optimisation, such as electric trains and stabling and promoting eco-friendly commuting initiatives like improving congestion through network capacity and performance improvements.

43.     The impacts of the complete RLTP on the climate have been reported to the local board in another report on this agenda.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

44.     Auckland Council staff have worked with staff from Auckland Transport representatives in the development of the draft proposal.

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

Local impacts and local board views

45.     Local board views will be captured through this report and reported to the Planning Committee prior to decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

46.     The proposal to vary the RFT scheme constitutes a change in an allocation of funding within the overall ATAP indicative package and RLTP. The impacts of the RLTP on Māori have been reported to the local board.

47.     The RFT proposal has been incorporated in the RLTP consultation process, which includes extensive engagement with 19 mana whenua and mataawaka groups.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48.     The RFT scheme is projected to deliver around $1.5 billion of revenue over the 2018-2028 period. This constitutes a significant portion of the transport investment in Auckland.

49.     Without an RFT, council would need to either:

·   utilise another of the currently available funding mechanisms (general rates or an Interim Transport Levy), or

·   fund transport at the level of renewals and committed projects only.

50.     The rating options would result in ratepayers facing significant increases (10-11 per cent) in addition to the general rates increase and paying according to their property value, rather than based on use. To fund the transport budget at the level of renewals and committed projects only would have significant impacts on the growth and economy of Auckland.

Risks and mitigations

51.     The key risk is a potential misalignment of the RFT scheme from the ATAP programme and the RLTP. This variation proposal looks to mitigate this risk by updating the scheme and the RLTP in tandem.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

52.     Public consultation on the proposal takes place from 29 March to 2 May 2021.

53.     The Planning Committee will receive public feedback and local board views on the proposal in May 2021.

54.     The Planning Committee and Governing Body will consider the adoption of a proposal for submission to government.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft proposal to vary Regional Fuel Tax scheme project details (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Proposal for a Regional Fuel Tax (2018) (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Justine Yu - Senior Advisor - Financial Policy

Michael Burns - Manager Financial Strategy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to make new navigation rules

File No.: CP2021/03356

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal to make new navigation rules before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its views on how a Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru 2021 / Auckland Council Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls, staff have prepared summary and deliberation reports.

3.       The proposal continues to regulate the use of Auckland’s navigable waters (for example by recreational vessels, kite boarders, swimmers, divers, ferries, and cargo vessels) to help minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage.

4.       The main proposals are to:

·   increase the maximum speed limit on the Waitemata Harbour Zone to 18 knots to allow faster movement of public transport vessels, but still travel at a safe speed

·   clarify existing rules, including about swimming, events and support vessels

·   make new rules about novel craft (for example a motorised surfboard)

·   align rules about the use of Ōrākei Basin with current accepted practices

·   remove rules about licensing of commercial vessels for hire and marine mammal protections as these are more appropriately addressed in separate legislation

·   update the format and wording of the rules to be easier to read and understand.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole local board area. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7.       The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 7 May 2021. The Governing Body will make a final decision in July 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru 2021 / Auckland Council Navigation Safety Bylaw 2021 and associated controls as attached to this agenda report.

b)      provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c)      appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021.

d)      delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021.

Horopaki

Context

The Navigation Safety Bylaw and controls regulate activity on Auckland’s navigable waters

8.       The Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-Rohe Urungi Āhuru 2021 / Auckland Council Navigation Bylaw 2021 and associated controls makes rules that seek to minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance, and damage within Auckland’s navigable waters.

9.       The rules are administered by the Harbourmaster using a graduated approach to compliance. This includes the use of infringement fines as an alternative to prosecution.

10.     The Bylaw is one part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

·   Maritime Transport Act and Maritime Rules that impose national water safety rules

·   Resource Management Act to protect the environment

·   Marine Mammal Protection Act to protect marine mammals.

11.     The Bylaw expires on 31 July 2021. The council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new Bylaw and associated controls for public feedback

12.     On 13 October 2020 the Governing Body approved a proposal to make a new Bylaw for public consultation (Item 11, GB/2020/117).

13.     The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw shown in the figure below.

14.     The proposal regulates the use of Auckland’s navigable waters (for example by recreational vessels, kite boarders, swimmers, divers, ferries, and cargo vessels) to help minimise the risk of accidents, nuisance and damage.

15.     The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 16 November 2020 until 14 February 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 247 people.

Figure One: Decisions leading to the proposal

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

16.     The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how a Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

17.     Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021.

18.     The nature of the views is at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

·   indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

·   recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

19.     A total of 16 people and one organisation from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback. There was majority support for Proposals two to eight and split support for Proposal one, similar to the total support from all people who provided feedback.

Table One: Percentage support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal

Total support from local board area

Total support from people across Auckland

1:     Increase the maximum speed limit on the Waitematā Harbour Zone to 18 knots (from 12 knots) to allow faster movement of vessels (including public transport vessels).

29 per cent (5/17 submitters)

39 per cent

2:     Amend existing rules about carrying a means of communication on vessel, to carrying at least two independent forms of communication on a vessel

71 per cent (12/17 submitters)

70 per cent

3:     Make new rules about novel craft (for example a motorised surfboard)

76 per cent (13/17 submitters)

85 per cent

4a:   Make new rules for the Tamaki River Entrance

71 per cent (12/17 submitters)

69 per cent

4b:   Make new rules for the Commercial Port Area

71 per cent (12/17 submitters)

75 per cent

5:     Align rules about the use of Ōrākei Basin with current accepted practices

56 per cent (10/17 submitters)

71 per cent

6:     Remove rules about licensing of commercial vessels for hire as it more appropriately addressed in separate legislation

65 per cent (11/17 submitters)

77 per cent

7:     Remove rules about marine mammals as it more appropriately addressed in separate legislation

71 per cent (12/17 submitters)

76 per cent

8:     Clarify existing rules (including about swimming, events and support vessels) to be more certain and update the format of the Bylaw to be easier to read and understand

76 per cent (13/17 submitters)

82 per cent

20.     Key themes from feedback from people in the local board area are consistent with key themes from all public feedback. For example, that the proposal:

·   ensures public safety, specifically by requiring an extra form of communication and creating rules for novel craft

·   create dangerous wake, therefore the speed should be retained at 12 knots or reduced

·   creates clarity, reduces duplication, is more efficient, and is enforceable.

21.     The full proposal can be viewed in the link to the 13 October 2020 Regulatory Committee agenda, page 23 (Attachments A to item 9). Attachments A to D of this report contain a summary of all public feedback, all public feedback related to the local board area, operational and non-bylaw-related feedback and draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22.     Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on the public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     There are no implications for climate change arising from this decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24.     The proposal impacts the operation of the Harbourmaster and other council teams involved in resource management, events, and public transport (ferry operations). These teams are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

25.     Local board views were sought on a draft proposal at a workshop in August 2020 and at their business meeting in September 2020 because the topic is considered to have high community interest.

26.     All 21 local boards provided views, most in support of public consultation. A summary of local board views, staff responses and any changes made to the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 13 October 2020 Regulatory committee agenda, page 173 (Attachment B to Item 9).

27.     This report provides an opportunity for the local board to give views on public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     The Bylaw can contribute to the Māori Plan’s key directions and aspirations by supporting safe recreational, cultural and economic activities on Auckland’s navigable waters.

29.     The Bylaw regulates a number of activities undertaken by Māori for example, waka ama, other cultural or sporting events on the water and the operation of commercial vessels.

30.     During the review, mana whenua and mataawaka indicated a preference to provide feedback on any proposed changes to the Bylaw through a public consultation process.

31.     The majority of people identifying as Māori who provided feedback support proposals two through to eight and have split support for proposal one. This is consistent with the overall percentage of public feedback in support.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32.     There are no financial implications from this decision.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     There is a reputational risk that feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole local board area. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34.     The Bylaw Panel on 7 May 2021 will consider all formal local board views and public feedback, deliberate, and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision on any amendments to the Bylaw in July 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Summary of public feedback (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Public feedback from people in the Howick Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Operational and non-bylaw-related feedback

37

d

Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Baylee Vyle – Policy Analyst

Fereti Lualua - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Highbrook Park Trust Disestablishment

File No.: CP2021/03451

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek endorsement from Howick Local Board to disestablish the Highbrook Park Trust following consultation with its Board and Manager Area Operations, Community Facilities (Area Manager).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Highbrook Park Trust (the Trust) is a legacy Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) that was established in August 2000 to acquire, establish and maintain a park on the Waiouru Peninsula, adjacent to the Highbrook Business Park.

3.       The Trust provides for the lifetime of the Trust to be limited to a maximum of 15 years. This timeframe was extended in August 2015. 

4.       The park of approximately 40 hectares was established subsequent to the establishment of the Trust. Auckland Council provides an annual grant (management fee) to the Trust to maintain the park.

5.       During 2020, the Community Facilities department reviewed its funding arrangements with all stakeholders. Following the review, the Area Operations team believe that disestablishing the Trust provides an opportunity for the council to save money through its internal maintenance teams.

6.       In addition to increasing costs of servicing the park, the maintenance agreement does not require the Highbrook Park Trust to fund the depreciation of the assets in the park. By disestablishing the Trust, and ensuring depreciation is accounted for, the council will be able to spread the cost of replacing assets over time.

7.       The intent on disestablishing the Trust is that all assets will be transferred to Auckland Council on dissolution of the Trust.

8.       The Area Manager has met with Highbrook’s Trust Board advising them that the grant would not be renewed in 2020. The Trust was informed that the services will continue to be delivered on a month-by-month basis, ceasing on 30 June 2021.

9.       Disestablishing the Trust means the council will supply maintenance in the park from
1 July 2021. The supply of maintenance services by the council does not lead to new financial implications, but greater opportunities for future savings.

10.     This report seeks support from the local board of the recommendation that the Highbrook Park Trust be disestablished from 30 June 2021, and a letter of thanks be sent Highbrook Park’s Trust board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      support the recommendation to disestablish the Highbrook Park Trust as of
30 June 2021.

b)      send a letter of thanks to Highbrook Park Trust Board noting the achievement and vision of its members in developing a great business park in Tāmaki Makaurau.

 

Horopaki

Context

11.     The Trust was established in August 2000 by Manukau City Council and Highbrook Development Limited. It is a legacy CCO of Auckland Council. The purpose of the Trust was to acquire, establish and maintain a park on the Waiouru Peninsula (adjacent to the Highbrook Business Park in East Tamaki) for the benefit of the public of the region. The business park is managed by Goodman NZ.

12.     The other objectives of the Trust are to:

·   ensure the effective, efficient and safe use of the park

·   protect environmentally sensitive and geologically important areas within the park

·   ensure that uses and activities within the park are compatible with the adjoining communities

·   maintain references within the park to the historic uses of the land.

13.     Approximately 30 hectares of land was initially transferred to the Trust, and subsequently an additional 10 hectares was acquired and transferred. The area in question is highlighted in Attachment A of the report. The business park has been developed in stages and the park areas associated with each stage have been transferred to the Trust for management.

14.     The Trust has been responsible for the development of the park and has undertaken extensive landscaping and planting. The Trust is also responsible for the ongoing management, maintenance and administration of the park. The council currently pays an annual grant (management fee) to the Trust to meet the Trust’s annual budgeted expenses, including park maintenance.

15.     The Trust provides for the disestablishment of the Trust, on a date to be nominated by the Trust and agreed with the council some 15 years after the establishment of the Trust, which was in August 2000.

16.     Once disestablished, the Trust states that the land owned by the Trust must be transferred to the council “to be held by the council on trust for any charitable purpose or purposes in the region approved by the council as being as similar as is practicable to the objectives for which the Trust was established”. 

17.     The trustees must apply any residual Trust funds remaining after the Trust has met all its costs, expenses and liabilities, “to any charitable purpose or purposes in the region approved by the council as being as similar as is practicable to the objectives for which the Trust was established”. 

18.     This report seeks support from the local board for the recommendation that the Trust be disestablished.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19.     Staff from the Community Facilities department and the council’s Legal department met with the Highbrook Park Trust Board in March 2021.

20.     The Trust Board was advised that in addition to increasing costs of servicing the park, the maintenance agreement does not require Highbrook Park Trust to fund the depreciation of the assets in the park.

21.     Following review of its funding arrangements, the Area Operations team believe that the disestablishing of the Trust provides an opportunity for the council to save money through its internal maintenance teams. It also ensures depreciation is accounted for allowing council to spread the cost of replacing assets over time.

22.     The savings are anticipated to be approximately $100,000 per annum. In addition, the council management will ensure that there is appropriate provision made for the replacement of assets within the park, which the Trust is currently not required to do.

23.     For these reasons, staff decided that the grant to the Trust will not be renewed, and that the council will take over maintenance of the park from 1 July 2021. As the Trust will no longer be undertaking these activities, it is recommended that the Trust be wound up, as it performs no other function.

24.     The continued depreciation of assets has been flagged in Long-term Plan considerations with the Head of Asset Management and Investment Programme, Community Facilities

25.     Once disestablished, the land owned by the Trust must be transferred to the council “to be held by the council on trust for any charitable purpose or purposes in the region approved by the council as being as similar as is practicable to the objectives for which the Trust was established”.

26.     Once the land owned by the Trust is transferred back to the council, the park will continue to be managed as public open space until such time as classification of the land can be determined.

27.     Auckland Council staff have engaged with the Trustees to discuss with them that the grant would not be renewed, the implications for the Trust, and the transition towards the council management of the park. The Trustees are actively co-operating with the transition towards the council management.

28.     There are no other obligations that the council will inherit by disestablishing the Trust.

29.     It is recommended that the Howick Local Board endorse the disestablishment of the Highbrook Park Trust as of 30 June 2021, and send a letter of thanks to the Highbrook Park Trust Board noting the achievement and vision of its members in developing a great business park in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30.     The designated impact level of the recommended decision on Green House Gas emissions has “no impact” because the proposal continues an existing activity and does not introduce any new sources of emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31.     The disestablishment of the Highbrook Park Trust has no impact on any other department of Auckland Council, as Community Facilities will be solely responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the park.

32.     No other Council-controlled Organisation is affected by this proposal.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33.     Staff from Community Facilities and CCO Governance staff held a workshop with the local board in 2020 advising of the proposal to disestablish the Highbrook Park Trust.

34.     The local board provided in principle support to continue with the proposal and seek formal approval.

35.     Including the 40 hectares along the Waiouru Peninsula as a local asset will facilitate greater community involvement in further potential development and encourage aligned public use of the park land.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36.     The decision whether to consent to the disestablishment of the Trust does not have an impact on issues of significance to iwi, as the current management agreement will continue on a day-to-day basis.

37.     There are references within the park to the historic uses of the land, and these, together with the park brochure and website, highlight the significance of the area, particularly the Pukekiwiriki crater.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38.     Auckland Council’s contribution, through a grant to the Highbrook Park Trust to deliver maintenance and associated activities such as management, legal fees and rates for the 2021/2022 financial year, will be $377,947, increasing year on year with inflation. The costs for continued maintenance that aligns with the current Full Facility and Arboriculture Contracts will total $269,224 for the same period. Therefore, by delivering the aforementioned activities internally, a positive financial position of approximately $100,000 is anticipated.

39.     As the assets within the park are currently under the ownership (management) of the trust, depreciation has not been allowed for in the councils finances. Should the Trust not be disestablished, the resulting financial implications will create an operational budget shortfall as the assets potentially begin to fail. Community Facilities has allowed for renewals funding within Highbrook Park in the local boards draft three-year work programme. The continued depreciation of assets has been flagged in Long-term Plan considerations with the Head of Asset Management and Investment Programme, Community Facilities

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40.     There are no identified financial or associated risks with the recommendations made in this report to disestablish the Highbrook Park Trust. The recommendations are envisaged to have a positive long-term impact.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41.     Following the outcome of the local board meeting, staff will be seeking committee approval for Auckland Council to take ownership of the land and disestablish the Trust.

42.     Auckland Council’s legal department and Highbrook Park Trust will develop the appropriate amendments to the trust documentation.

43.     Auckland Council’s Community Facilities department and Highbrook Park Trust will develop the appropriate amendments to the Operational Agreement.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Highbrook Park Map

45

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Marcel Morgan – Manager Area Operation, Community Facilities

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Authorisers

Phil Wilson - Governance Director

Kim O’Neill – Acting General Manager, Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Review of the Code of Conduct - draft revised code

File No.: CP2021/03998

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek formal feedback on the draft Auckland Council Code of Conduct.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Every council is required to adopt a Code of Conduct which must set out:

(a)   understandings and expectations adopted by the local authority about the manner in which members may conduct themselves while acting in their capacity as members, including—

(i)    behaviour toward one another, staff, and the public; and

(ii)   disclosure of information, including (but not limited to) the provision of any document, to elected members that—

(A)  is received by, or is in the possession of, an elected member in his or her capacity as an elected member; and

(B)  relates to the ability of the local authority to give effect to any provision of this Act; and

(b)   a general explanation of—

(i)    the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987; and

3.       All elected members must comply with the Code of Conduct adopted by the Governing Body.

4.       Auckland Council’s current code of conduct was last reviewed in 2013. In 2020, staff sought agreement from local boards and the Governing Body on the scope and process for reviewing the current code.

5.       An initial draft of the code of conduct was presented to local board workshops in March/April 2021 to provide feedback for staff to consider when developing the second draft.

6.       The second draft of the code of conduct is attached for formal feedback which will be reported to the Governing Body when it meets to adopt the revised code on 27 May 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      consider and provide its feedback to staff on the draft revised Auckland Council Code of Conduct to append to the report to the Governing Body on 27 May 2021.

b)      support the proposed revised draft Auckland Council Code of Conduct to be adopted by the Governing Body.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       In October and November 2020, presentations on the review of the draft Auckland Council Code of Conduct (draft code) process and scope were made to local board workshops and local board feedback was reported to the Governing Body on 26 November 2020.

8.       The Governing Body resolved to:

a)      note the feedback from local boards provided in Attachment B.

b)      agree that the scope of the review of the Auckland Council Code of Conduct will include consideration of:

i)       retaining and updating principles

ii)      retaining a process for complaints

iii)     appointing conduct commissioners

iv)     making reports of investigations by conduct commissioners public unless there are significant reasons to withhold them

v)      defining materiality

vi)     providing for sanctions which will be decided by conduct commissioners

vii)    providing policies on:

A)     conflicts of interest (including declarations on an interest register)

B)     confidential information access and disclosure

C)     election year

D)     communications

E)      media

F)      social media

G)     governance roles and responsibilities

H)     working with staff

I)       elected members expenses.

c)      agree that the process for finalising the review includes a:

i)       draft Code being presented to a Governing Body workshop followed by local board workshops (February 2021)

ii)      second draft incorporating feedback from workshops being presented to the Governing Body / Local Board Chairs meeting for joint discussion (March 2021)

iii)     a final draft reported to local boards for formal feedback (April 2021)

iv)     a final draft reported to Governing Body for adoption (May 2021).

9.       During March 2021, the draft code, in line with the agreed scope, was presented to local board workshops so that feedback could be considered when preparing a second draft for formal presentation to local board business meetings.

10.     The second draft code is appended as Attachment A for consideration at this meeting.

11.     Due to the way that dates for the joint meetings of the Governing Body and local board chairpersons fall, the presentation to that meeting was moved to the Local Board Chairs Forum on 12 April 2021.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12.     Local board members generally supported the first draft code. The feedback given at workshops is summarised in the following paragraphs. The feedback was informally provided by individual members and not by resolution of the full boards.

Conduct Commissioner

13.     Comments at the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Ōtara-Papatoetoe and Waitematā Local Board workshops noted the need for diversity of commissioners. A comment at the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board felt the panel of three was preferable to a single commissioner.

Comments

14.     Most local boards did not object to replacing the panel with a single Conduct Commissioner and so the provision in the draft code for a single Conduct Commissioner has not been changed.

Decisions of the Investigator and Conduct Commissioner

15.     A couple of comments queried these decisions not being open to challenge. 

Comments

16.     The draft code has been amended to clarify that although the code itself does not provide an appeal process, this does not prevent the intervention of the Ombudsman or the courts.

Conflict of Interest Policy

17.     The draft code reduced the threshold for declaring gifts from $300 to $50 based on a survey of other councils. There was feedback from some local boards that a threshold of $100 would be more realistic.

Comments

18.     The Conflict of Interest Policy has been amended to set the threshold for declaring gifts at $100. The purpose of declaring gifts as part of the register is transparency around any sense of obligation that a member might have towards those who provide gifts. Often, the greater the gift the greater the sense of obligation. A threshold set at too low a level would require declarations of items which could result in non-compliance with making declarations due the administrative requirements and which would likely not create any sense of obligation to the giver. Staff consider a threshold of $100 as being reasonable for elected members. By comparison, the threshold for staff is $0 (all gifts need to be declared) but this is in the context of being work-related. The meaning of ‘work-related’ for elected members is less defined than it is for staff and could mean a greater range of gifts that need to be declared.

Confidential information

19.     One workshop noted that restrictions on disclosure should apply to discussions in workshops. 

Comments

20.     Attachment B to the draft code has been amended to recognise confidentiality implications around workshops (which would not apply if a workshop was open to the public). 

Other feedback

21.     The draft code has been amended to clarify various additional matters that were raised. These include:

a)    references in the draft code to decisions of the Investigator or Conduct Commissioner being final mean that the code does not provide an appeal process, but this does not prevent recourse to the Ombudsman or to the courts

b)    clarification that a complaint would normally be provided to the respondent in full but there may be occasions where, for reasons such as privacy, identities might not be provided

c)    under principles applying to consideration of complaints, the word ‘reasonableness’ has been added to the bullet:

the concepts of natural justice, fairness and reasonableness will apply in the determination of any complaints made under this code.

Additional changes that have been made by staff

22.     There have been additional changes made by staff to improve the presentation and as a result of internal legal review:

a)    the relationship of the attachments to the draft code has been clarified in section 2 of the code. This section notes that some attachments are considered to be adopted with the code and have provisions that can lead to a breach of the draft code.

b)    in the complaints section 4.2, the list of situations pertinent to lodging a complaint has been removed such that a complaint must simply relate to a member acting in their capacity as a member.

Additional changes that might yet be made

23.     The second draft that is attached to this report has also been sent to the Ombudsman and Professor Ron Paterson for comment. The Ombudsman has previously expressed interest in the protocol relating to confidential information and Professor Paterson is the current Principal Convenor of the Conduct Review Panel. There may be changes arising from their feedback.

24.     There may be changes arising from further internal legal review.

25.     There may be changes arising from feedback from local boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26.     The code of conduct is purely procedural. It does not use any resources that could have an impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27.     The code of conduct applies to elected members acting in their capacity as elected members.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28.     The draft code is ultimately adopted at a meeting of the Governing Body, but all elected members are required to comply with it. It is important, therefore, that local boards have adequate input into the review of the draft code. Local boards will resolve their comments which will be conveyed to the Governing Body when it considers adopting the revised draft code.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29.     The Māori community is affected by the relationship it has with its local council. The conduct of members has relevance to this. The revised draft code centres around two key principles, an ethical principle and a relationship principle. These principles contribute to the relationship the council develops with its Māori community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     A key financial aspect of the revised draft code relates to replacing the current conduct review panel of three members with a single Conduct Commissioner (who is drawn from a list of commissioners approved by the Governing Body). 

31.     Under the current code, if a complaint cannot be resolved in its initial stages, it is escalated to the Principal Convenor of the panel and could result in the panel conducting a hearing for a cost of possibly around $10,000.

32.     A single Conduct Commissioner would reduce that cost.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33.     The key risk of not adopting the revised draft code lies primarily in the Conflict of Interest Policy.  The current policy does not reflect the current law.

34.     A mitigation is that at its meeting on 27 May 2021, the Governing Body will be asked to adopt the attachments to the code of conduct part by part so that the likelihood of one singular matter holding up adoption of the whole code of conduct is lessened. Additionally, if there are issues with a particular attachment, they can be further researched and reported back as a separate part.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35.     The feedback from local boards will be incorporated into the report to the Governing Body which will recommend adoption of a revised Code of Conduct.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Code of Conduct - for local boards (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Draft Code of Conduct - attachments for local boards (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Rose Leonard - Manager Governance Services

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Statement of proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw and controls

File No.: CP2021/02943

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support on the draft statement of proposal to amend the Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls before it is approved for public consultation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its view on the statement of proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and controls, staff have prepared a draft proposal.

3.       The draft proposal would continue to enable council to regulate the keeping of animals in order to minimise risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places caused by people interacting with animals.

4.       The main draft proposed changes are to:

·   require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban properties with an area less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

·   incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

·   improve the definitions of ‘nuisance’ and ‘public place’

·   update the format and wording of the Bylaw and controls to make them easier to read and understand.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its view on the draft proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that the draft proposal or the local board’s views do not reflect the view of people in the local board area. This risk would be partly mitigated by the opportunity for the local board to provide views on public feedback prior to a final decision.

7.       The local board views will be provided to the Regulatory Committee in May to recommend a statement of proposal to the Governing Body. Public consultation is scheduled for July, deliberations in November and a final Governing Body decision in December 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Local Board:

a)      support the draft statement of proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report to amend the Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 and associated controls for public consultation.

Horopaki

Context

The Animal Management Bylaw enables council to regulate the keeping of animals

8.       The Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture-ā-rohe Tiaki Kararehe 2015 / Auckland Council Animal Management Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) and associated controls (controls) seeks to minimise animal-related risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour, and misuse of council-controlled public places.

9.       The Bylaw and controls achieve this by specifying rules about animal ownership and interaction and by limiting ownership of specific animals in urban areas.

10.     The rules are administered by the councils Regulatory Compliance team using a graduated approach to compliance.

11.     The Bylaw and controls are one part of a wider regulatory framework. For example, the Animal Products Act 1999 and Animal Welfare Act 1999 for animal welfare, Resource Management Act 1991 and Biosecurity Act 1993 to protect the environment and Dog Control Act 1996 for dog management.

The Regulatory Committee have decided to amend the Bylaw and controls

12.     The Regulatory Committee decided to commence the process to amend the Bylaw as follows:

Table One: Process to amend the Bylaw

17 March 2020

(REG/2020/17)

Regulatory Committee endorsed the statutory bylaw review findings that:

·   a bylaw is still the most appropriate way to manage specific animal issues in relation to people, for example limiting the number of poultry in urban residential areas minimises noise and odour nuisance to neighbours

·   the current Bylaw approach is appropriate, but the content, structure and wording could be improved

·   the current Bylaw does not give rise to any implications under, and is not inconsistent with, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

17 November 2020

(REG/2020/78)

Regulatory Committee instructed staff to draft an amended Bylaw (Option two) after considering four options:

·   Option one: status quo – confirm (retain) current Bylaw

·   Option two: amend the current Bylaw – improve the status quo

·   Option three: replace the current Bylaw – new bylaw about animals

·   Option four: revoke Bylaw – no bylaw and instead rely on other existing methods.

13.     Staff have prepared a draft statement of proposal (draft proposal) to implement the decision of the Regulatory Committee by amending the Bylaw and controls (Attachment A).

14.     The draft proposal includes the reasons and decisions leading to the proposed amendments and a comparison between the existing and amended bylaws and controls.

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal 

15.     The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal in Attachment A by resolution to the Regulatory Committee before it is finalised for public consultation.

16.     For example, the board could support the draft proposal for public consultation, recommend changes, or defer comment until after it has considered public feedback on the proposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft proposal makes improvements to the current bylaw and controls

17.     The draft proposal seeks to improve the current Bylaw and controls to minimise risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour and misuse of council-controlled public places. The table below summarises the main draft proposals in comparison to the current Bylaw.

Table Two: Draft proposals and their reasonings in comparison to the current Bylaw

Draft proposals

Reasons for draft proposal

Require an approval to keep more than two standard beehives on urban properties with an area less than 2000 square metres (no approval currently required)

·  to minimise bee-related nuisance in areas with growing population density while still allowing for the keeping of bees in urban areas.

Incorporate rules from another bylaw about the feeding of animals on private property

·  to streamline rules about animals into a single bylaw, as existing rules about the feeding of wild and feral animals on private property are currently included in the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw 2015

·  moving this clause to the Bylaw was suggested in the review findings to the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw (REG/2020/50).

Improve definitions of ‘nuisance’ and ‘public place’

·  to align with the definitions in the Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 to improve consistency across council bylaws.

Update the Bylaw format and structure

·  to align with best practice for bylaw drafting and make the Bylaw easier to read and understand.

18.     Limits on the number of beehives and stock would continue to only apply to urban areas as defined within the Auckland Unitary Plan, for example:

·   Aotea/Great Barrier has no urban areas and is not subject to these limits

·   rural townships such as Helensville and Clevedon are urban areas.

The draft proposal complies with statutory requirements

19.     The draft proposal has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements. The amended Bylaw and controls:

·   help minimise risks to public health and safety, nuisance, offensive behaviour, and misuse of council-controlled public places

·   use a format and words that are easier to read and understand

·   are authorised by statute, not repugnant to other legislation and not unreasonable

·   do not give rise to any implications and are not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Staff recommend the local board consider providing its views on the draft proposal

20.     Staff recommend that the local board consider the draft proposal and whether it wishes to provide its views by resolution to the Regulatory Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21.     There are no implications for climate change arising from this decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22.     The draft proposal impacts councils Regulatory Compliance team, who implement the Bylaw. The unit is aware of the impacts of the draft proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23.     The Bylaw is important to local boards as it is an area of high community interest. They also have the delegated authority to make conditions about horse riding in public places.

24.     Local board views on the review were provided in September 2019 (see Attachment B). The main view of local board members during the review was to improve the Bylaw’s clarity, minimise the misuse of council-controlled public places and to address animal-specific controls. The Regulatory Committee as part of its decisions on options on 17 November 2020 (REG/2020/78) directed staff to address some but not all views provided (see Attachment C).

25.     The local board has an opportunity in this report to provide its views on the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee.

26.     The local board will also have further opportunity to provide its views to a Bylaw Panel on any public feedback to the proposal from people in the local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27.     The Bylaw has significance for Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku.

28.     Staff discussed the Bylaw with mana whenua at the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua hui in April 2019. The main view of mana whenua was to improve the clarity and how it relates to Māori and papakāinga. The draft proposal addresses this by clarifying that limits on the ownership of animals in urban areas do not apply to papakāinga within the Māori Purpose Zone of the Auckland Council Unitary Plan.

29.     Mana whenua and mataawaka will also have opportunity to provide further feedback during the public consultative process on the proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the draft proposal for public consultation. The Governing Body will consider any financial implications associated with public notification at a later date.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     The following risk has been identified

Table Three: Risks and mitigations

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The draft proposal or the local board’s views do not reflect the view of people in the local board area

there may be negative attention to council regarding the Bylaw.

The local board will have an opportunity to consider any public feedback and provide its formal views to a Bylaw Panel prior to the final decision.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Staff will present a proposal and any local board views to the Regulatory Committee on 11 May 2021. The next steps are shown in the diagram below.

Figure One: Next steps

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Statement of Proposal (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Previous local board views

59

c

Regulatory Committee Decisions on Bylaw Improvements

65

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Saralee Gore - Graduate Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Proposal to make a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw

File No.: CP2021/03206

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek support on the draft proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-rohe Tauhokohoko, Takunetanga, me ngā Whakaahua i ngā Wāhi Marea 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 before it is finalised for public consultation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To enable the local board to provide its view on the proposal to make a new Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw, staff have prepared a draft proposal.

3.       The draft proposal would continue to enable council to regulate trading activities, events and filming to minimise risks to public safety, nuisance, and the misuse of council-controlled public places.[1]

4.       The main draft proposals are to:

·   continue to regulate trading,[2] events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

·   set specific rules for rental micromobility devices

·   identify filming in a separate category to events

·   merge trading activities such as busking and pavement art under street performance

·   update the Bylaw format, structure, definitions, the title, exemptions, approval conditions and other matters to make a new bylaw easier to understand and comply with.

5.       Staff recommend that the local board provide its view on the draft proposal.

6.       There is a reputational risk that the draft proposal or the local board’s views do not reflect the view of people in their local board area. This risk would be partly mitigated by the opportunity for the local board to provide views on public feedback prior to a final decision.

7.       The local board views will be provided to the Regulatory Committee in May to recommend a proposal to the Governing Body. Public consultation is scheduled for July 2021, deliberations for October 2021 and a final Governing Body decision for November 2021.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      support the draft Statement of Proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-rohe Tauhokohoko, Takunetanga, me ngā Whakaahua i ngā Wāhi Marea 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 for public consultation.

Horopaki

Context

The Bylaw regulates trading, events and filming in council-controlled public places

8.       Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ture ā-rohe Tauhokohoko, Takunetanga, me ngā Whakaahua i ngā Wāhi Marea 2022 / Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (Bylaw) seeks to minimise risks to public safety, nuisance and the misuse of council-controlled public places caused by trading activities (including micromobility), events and filming.

9.       The Bylaw:

·   achieves this by requiring prior approval for most trading, event and filming activities and enabling council to make additional requirements in a separate control[3]

·   is administered by several council departments and council-controlled organisations

·   is enforced by the Licencing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information / education / enforcement)

·   is one part of a wider regulatory framework of Acts, regulations and bylaws[4]

·   will expire on 26 February 2022, meaning council must adopt a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

The Regulatory Committee decided to make a new bylaw

10.     The Regulatory Committee requested staff commence the process to make a new bylaw.

Figure One: Process to make a new bylaw

 

 

 

11.     Staff have prepared a draft proposal to implement the decision of the committee (Attachment A). The draft proposal presents the reasons and decisions which led to a new bylaw being proposed and provides a comparison between the current and proposed bylaws.

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal

12.     The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal in Attachment A by resolution to the Regulatory Committee before it is finalised for public consultation.

13.     For example, the board could support the draft proposal for public consultation, recommend changes or defer comment until after it has considered public feedback on the proposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft Proposal makes a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw

14.     The draft proposal makes a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw to better minimise public safety risks, nuisance, and misuse of council-controlled public places.

15.     The table below summarises the main proposals in comparison to the current Bylaw.

Table One: A Summary of the main proposals and reasons in comparison to the current Bylaw

Main proposals

Reasons for proposals

· continue to regulate trading activities, events and filming in a similar way to the current Bylaw

· to continue to regulate trading activities, events and filming in council-controlled public places by requiring an approval (licence or permit)

· to continue to retain existing exemptions to holding an approval

· to continue to set approval conditions and grant approvals with or without conditions when deciding an application.

· set more specific rules for rental micromobility devices

· to include specific rules for rental micromobility independently from mobile trading due to higher risk to public safety from power-assisted devices

· to reflect conditions as set in codes of practice

· to make a bylaw easier to understand and comply with.

· identify filming as a separate category to events

· to reflect the lower risk to public safety and nuisance as filming activities do not directly involve the public

· to make a new bylaw easier to understand and comply with.

· merge some trading activities such as busking and pavement art under street performance

· to reflect how busking and pavement art are regulated in practise under the street performance approval

· to make a new bylaw easier to understand and comply with.

· update the Bylaw format and structure, clarify definitions, title, exemptions, approval conditions and other matters

· to ensure and apply consistent approach to council regulation

· to ensure more responsive structure and rules to help minimise risks to public safety, nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places

· to make a new bylaw easier to understand and comply with

· to comply with the best practice bylaw drafting standards.

The draft proposal complies with statutory requirements

16.     The draft new Bylaw has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements to:

·   help minimise safety risks, nuisance, and misuse of council-controlled public places

·   use a format and wording that are easier to read, understand and comply with 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 not be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act

·   not be inconsistent with the Reserves Act, Resource Management Act, Auckland Unitary Plan, Trespass Act, Fair Trading Act, Customer Guarantees Act, Road User Rule, Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act, Electricity (Safety) Regulations, Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw and Signage Bylaw.

Staff recommend the local board consider providing its views on the draft proposal

17.     Staff recommend that the local board consider the draft proposal and whether it wishes to provide its views by resolution to the Regulatory Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     There are no implications for climate change arising from this decision.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     The draft proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licencing and Regulatory Compliance Unit, Events in Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships Unit, Alcohol Licencing and Environmental Health Unit, Auckland Unlimited (previously known as Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development), Screen Auckland and Auckland Transport.

20.     Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the draft proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21.     The draft new Bylaw impacts on local governance as it regulates trading, events and filming activities in council-controlled public places, for example local parks.

22.     Representative local board views were provided in February 2021 through a joint working party established by the Regulatory Committee.[5] The main views of group members were unanimous support for a new bylaw and suggestions on the detailed content.[6]

23.     These views were considered by the Regulatory Committee on 16 February 2021 (REG/2021/4). The committee directed staff to draft a new Bylaw. Suggestions on the detailed content are included in the draft new Bylaw.

24.     The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee.

25.     The local board will have further opportunity to provide its views to a Bylaw Panel on any public feedback to the Proposal from people in their local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26.     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.

27.     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.

28.     The draft proposal continues to address waste management at events by requiring compliance with a waste plan in a way that is easier to understand. Other concerns for better enforcement relate to implementation rather than the making of a new bylaw and have been forwarded to relevant staff.

29.     Staff will proactively engage with mana whenua and mataawaka during the public consultative process to ensure Māori are able to provide their views on the proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decisions to support the draft proposal for public consultation. The Governing Body will consider any financial implications associated with public notification at a later date.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     The following risk has been identified.

Table Two: Risks and Mitigations

If...

Then...

Mitigation

The views of the local board on the draft Proposal may differ from the views of people in the community.

There may be negative attention to council regarding the Bylaw.

The local board will have an opportunity to consider any public feedback and provide its formal views to a Bylaw Panel prior to the final decision being made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32.     Staff will present a proposal and any local board views to the Regulatory Committee on 11 May 2021. The next steps are shown in the diagram below.

Figure Two: Next steps

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Statement of Proposal (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Magda Findlik - Principal Policy Analyst

Sam Bunge - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund 2020/2021

File No.: CP2021/03429

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.      To allocate the Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund for the 2020/2021 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      Line item 159 of the Howick Local Board work programme 2020/2021 allocates $105,000 of Asset Based Services (ABS) funding annually, for investment in sport and recreation initiatives.

3.      The purpose of the Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund is to support community groups to deliver participation initiatives to respond to identified needs in the local board area.

4.      This report recommends that three groups receive funding in the 2020/2021 financial year:

·   Pakuranga Rugby Club for the Howick Sports Awards: $21,000

·   Sport Auckland for programme delivery: $42,000

·   Howick Gymnastics to assist with rent payments $42,000.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)   allocate the Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund for the 2020/2021 financial year as follows:

i)     Pakuranga Rugby Club for the Howick Sports Awards: $21,000

ii)     Sport Auckland for programme delivery: $42,000

iii)    Howick Gymnastics to assist with rent payments $42,000.

 

Horopaki

Context

5.      The Howick Local Board has $105,000 of Asset Based Services (ABS) funding annually for investment in sport and recreation initiatives, as detailed in the local board work programme, line item 159.

6.      In previous years the fund has been allocated to sport and recreation groups in the Howick community for projects, programmes and operational support.

7.      In the 2018/2019 financial year, the $105,000 fund was allocated as follows:

·   $12,000 to the Pakuranga Rugby Club for the Howick Sports Awards

·   $44,000 to Sport Auckland to deliver sport initiatives such as ActiveAsian

·   the balance for the refresh of the Howick Sport and Recreation Facilities Plan.

8.      In the 2019/2020 financial year staff recommended the following;

·   $50,000 for Sport Auckland to increase the ActiveAsian programming

·   $20,000 for the Howick Sports Awards

·   $35.000 for Howick Gymnastics Club rent.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Pakuranga Rugby Club

9.      The Pakuranga Rugby Club have delivered the Howick Sports Awards in 2019 and 2020.

10.    The next awards will be held on 10 June 2021, as agreed by staff, the rugby club and the local board.

11.    The nomination process for the awards is underway now, and event management will start when the club receives funding.

Sport Auckland

12.    Sport Auckland have worked with staff to provide a programme delivery framework for the 2020/2021 financial year. The full delivery schedule was provided to the local board at a workshop on 3 December 2020, this includes;

·   increasing knowledge within community clubs on subjects selected using a locally led approach eg, finance, funding, governance, engaging with communities, strategic planning, volunteer management etc. Two workshops to be delivered by subject matter experts.

·   increasing participation in sport and active recreation of lower participation groups by delivery of workshops to children and young people, women and girls, and high deprivation populations

·   increasing sustainable participation in quality active recreation, play and sport amongst diverse populations within the community by new program delivery

·   engagement with the Asian community and provision of opportunities to participate in sport and physical activity by upskilling volunteers.

13.    Delivery of the programme for the following 12-month calendar year will start when they receive funding.

Howick Gymnastics Club

14.    Howick Gymnastics Club presented to the local board on 4 April 2019 because their current landlord, Eastgate Christian Centre, had indicated they will be increasing the club’s rent from $115,000 to $125,000 per annum.

15.    At this time the gymnastics club provided financial information to council which showed that they had been running at a deficit. The gymnastics club requested $50,000 per annum for three years from the local board to allow them to continue operating.

16.    Following a review in 2019, the gymnastics club have made some organisational changes and their financial situation is improving, however rent costs are still a challenge.

17.    In the 2018/2019 financial year the local board allocated $40,000 from the Parks Response Fund to contribute to their rent (HW/2019/69).

18.    In the 2020/2021 financial year, staff identified that $40,000 to assist with the clubs rent could come from the Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives fund.

19.    The gymnastics club historically have been self-sufficient. They have not had usage of any council resources or council assistance, while others on council land are usually on a community lease (with peppercorn rates).

20.    The gymnastics club is the cornerstone of the new Lloyd Elsmore Park multisport project.

21.    Staff recommend that the gymnastics club continue to receive financial assistance with their rent until the new multisport facility has been completed and they have their own facility.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.    There are no specific climate impacts anticipated in relation to the recommendations in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23.    Parks, Sport and Recreation staff manage the administration of the fund and hold relationships with the three groups.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24.    At the 3 December 2020 workshop, staff advised the local board that these groups would be recommended for funding through this report. The local board indicated support for the three groups to receive funding.

25.    The Howick Sport Awards are a positive celebration of sporting, sporting administration and voluntary achievements within the community.

26.    Community celebrations may encourage further participation in sport which will achieve positive sporting outcomes for Howick.

27.    In Aotearoa, women and girls are considered to be a low participant group. Howick Gymnastics Club is 80 per cent female. This means that the club has strong strategic alignment for investment as council’s Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 prioritises low participant groups for funding.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.    The provision of sport and recreation opportunities can support the aspirations of Māori, promoting community relationships and connection.

29.    Rent subsidy to Howick Gymnastics Club will enable the club to maintain current fees. Three per cent of club participants have identified as Māori. While cost can be a barrier for all members it is anticipated there will be positive Māori outcomes. 

30.    As part of Sport Auckland’s delivery schedule there will be community-led programmes that are targeted specifically at Māori participants. Outcomes will be captured and identified through quarterly reporting.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31.    The local board have approved the total allocation of $105,000 through the 2020/2021 work programme (HW/2020/126).

32.    This report recommends that the total budget of $105,000 be allocated across three activities to be delivered for the local Howick community:

·   Pakuranga Rugby Club for the Howick Sports Awards: $21,000

·   Sport Auckland for programme delivery: $42,000

·   Howick Gymnastics for rent payments: $42,000.

33.    Staff had recommended that $5000 is retained as contingency, however due to us allocating this in the last quarter of the financial year we are now proposing the $5000 be spread between the three groups.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34.    Two key risks have been identified in relation to the recommendations in this report:

·   COVID-19 could have a negative impact on the ability for groups to deliver programmes or be open for people to access, if alert levels change

·   if membership numbers for Howick Gymnastics decreases, there is a risk that the club will not have enough money to cover their rent.

35.    Staff have close relationships with all groups and can provide advice to them about how to mitigate these risks if they occur.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36.    Following local board approval to allocate of the Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund staff will:

·   arrange payments to the three groups

·   work with Pakuranga Rugby Club to help for the Howick Sports Awards 2021.

37.    Sport Auckland will start delivery of their programme when they receive funding from council.

38.    Sport Auckland will report quarterly to staff so staff can complete local board work programme quarterly updates. Sport Auckland will update the local board themselves if requested.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Marissa Holland - Sport & Recreation Lead

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Auckland Council’s Performance Report: Howick Local Board for November 2020 to February 2021

File No.: CP2021/03443

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Howick Local Board with an integrated performance report for November 2020 to February 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2020/2021 work programme.

3.       The key activity updates from this period are:

·   The Dick Quax Unveiling - Local civic events Howick
(Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 722)

·   A pump track installation - Howick renew skate parks
(Community Facilities: Build, Maintain and Renew work programme ID 2566)

·   Movies in the Park
(Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 725)

·   Pest Free Howick
(Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme ID 1547).

4.       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided an update against their work programme delivery. Activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). There are no activities with a red status.

5.       The financial performance report compared to the emergency budget 2020/2021 is attached as Attachment A. There are some points for the local board to note;

a)  Overall operating results for the first eight months of the year is five per cent below the budget due to lower revenue and expenditure. Both revenue and overall expenditure are below the budget by five per cent.

b)  Asset based services expenditure was affected by COVID-19 restrictions which resulted in the closures of council assets, facilities, and parks while essential services continued to be delivered.  In Locally Driven Initiatives, expenditure is below budget by 36 per cent as projects are in various stage of delivery.  Capital expenditure is below budget by 40 per cent and delivery is mainly focused on slip mediation prevention, local asset renewals and Flat bush water quality ponds.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the performance report for November 2020 to February 2021.

b)      reallocate $58,000 from the 'Community Response Fund' activity (Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 2336) into the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity (Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 732).

c)      note the activity description change for the Howick Litter Intelligence programme (Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme ID 1553).

d)      note the activity description and associated budget changes for the Howick Stream Improvement Programme (Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme ID 1556).

Horopaki

Context

6.       The Howick Local Board approved the 2020/2021 work programmes for the following operating departments on 17 August 2020:

·   Arts, Community and Events;

·   Parks, Sport and Recreation;

·   Libraries and Information;

·   Community Services: Service, Strategy and Integration; (now part of Connected Communities department)

·   Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew;

·   Community Leases;

·   External Partnerships;

·   Infrastructure and Environmental Services;

·   Plans and Places;

·   ATEED.

7.       Since the work programmes were approved the Customer and Communities Services directorate has been restructured. Two new departments were created - Connected Communities and Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships. The Southern Initiative and Western Initiative moved into the directorate as a new department - Community and Social Innovation. Units from the previous departments Arts, Community and Events; Libraries and Information; and Service, Strategy and Integration were incorporated into the three new departments. The table below shows the distribution

Table One: Changes to Departments in Customer and Communities Services directorate

Previous Department - Unit

Current Department - Unit

Arts, Community and Events - Community Places

Connected Communities – Community Places

Arts, Community and Events - Community Empowerment

Connected Communities – Community Empowerment

Arts, Community and Events - Community Empowerment (Youth)

Community and Social Innovation – Youth Empowerment

Arts, Community and Events - Arts & Culture

Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships – Arts & Culture

Arts, Community and Events - Events

Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships – Events

Service, Strategy and Integration

Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships – Service and Asset Planning

Libraries

Connected Communities – Libraries

The Southern Initiative

Community and Social Innovation – The Southern Initiative

The Western Initiative

Community and Social Innovation – The Western Initiative

8.       The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph One: Work programme activities by outcome

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

9.       The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph Two: Work programme by RAG status

10.     The graph below shows the activity status of activities which shows the stage of the activity in each departments the work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 


 

Graph Three: Work programme by activity status and department

Key activity updates

11.     The key achievements to report from the period include:

·   The Dick Quax unveiling – Local Civic Events (Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 722)

This event to unveil the Dick Quax memorial markers was delivered in December 2020 at Wakaraanga Reserve. There was an attendance of 120 guests from the community, including local board members and councillors.

·   Pump track installation - Howick renew skate parks (Community Facilities: Build, Maintain and Renew work programme ID 2566)
A pump track has been installed at Nixon Centennial Park. The next stage of this project is to scope the renewal of the Barry Curtis Park skate facility.

·   Movies in the Park (Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 725)
“Footloose" was screened at Barry Curtis Park, Flat Bush in February to an audience of approximately 1000 people. There were craft activities, games, silent disco and food stalls.

·   Pest Free Howick (Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme ID 1547)
The Pest Free Howick conservation assistants have been active in responding to pest plant and animal requests. The Chinese conservation assistant has also organised Chinese conservation workshops, with a focus on pest plants. The further expansion of the Pest Free Buckland’s Beach project is underway with the installation of additional rat and possum stations. The first Pest Free Howick cadetship programme has been implemented at Somerville Intermediate, with positive feedback from students and staff. Contractors have continued to maintain the Ōtara Creek plants.

Activities on hold

12.     The following work programme activity has been identified by operating departments as on hold:

·   Howick gymsports partnership grant (Parks, Sport and Recreation work programme ID 155). There is no anticipated draw-down of funding in 2020/2021. Next steps remain dependent on outcome of Howick Leisure Centre investigation.

Changes to the local board work programme

Activities with changes

13.     The following work programmes activities have changes which been formally approved by the board.

14.     Community Response Fund

(Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 2336)

a)  In a workshop on 6 August 2020, the local board gave direction to place the balance of its unallocated LDI opex of $120,000 into the Community Response Fund and then review this each trimester. The review would look to reallocate any balance within each trimester to Local Community Grants (Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 732). This is to prevent an accumulation of unspent funds in the Community Response Fund at year end.

b)  To date $22,000 has been allocated from the Community Response Fund leaving a balance of $98,000. Reallocating $58,000 will leave a balance of one third being $40,000 available for the third trimester.

15.     Howick Litter Intelligence Programme
(Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme ID 1553)

a)  In a workshop on 24 September 2020 the local board gave direction that they agree to two minor changes proposed for the activity description of the activity Howick Litter Intelligence.

b)  The first change related to one of the initiatives listed in the activity description to include conducting three beach litter surveys instead of one beach litter survey.

c)  The second change related to another initiative listed in the activity description. This was to change the activity to "deliver training sessions with two local community educators to facilitate workshops during the litter intelligence education programme" from "deliver training sessions with two local community groups to facilitate the litter intelligence education programme".

16.     Howick Stream Improvement Programme
(Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme activity ID 1556)

a)  In a workshop on 24 September 2020 the local board gave direction that they approved of changes to the budgets and details of initiatives listed within the Howick Stream Improvement Programme. This activity supports the Ōtara Waterways and Lakes Trust to carry out stream restoration and community engagement activities within the Howick Local Board area.

b)  The changes made are to support optimal delivery of the project following a successful funding application from the 1 Billion Trees programme of over $1 million which shows the value of the local board’s investment in this project. The overall budget for the activity in its entirety remains the same however different individual initiatives have changes to their budgets. The changes specifically are as follows:

Table Two: Changes to initiatives and their budgets

Initiative

Original

budget

New budget

Reason for change

Otara Waterways Coordinator

$19,220

$36,000

Increase to co-ordinator role hours to 12hrs per week to support 1Billion Trees programme delivery.

Stream Team Manager

$9380

$16,594

Increase to manager role hours to 15hrs per week to support 1Billion Trees programme delivery.

Community Planting Projects

$30,000

$0

No new planting projects are now required as this is covered by the 1Billion Trees programme.

Communications

$2500

$4000

Increase to communication roles’ hours to 2.5 hours to support 1Billion Trees programme delivery.

Community engagement coordinator

$0 

$4506

New contribution to increase the community engagement capacity of the Trust to support the 1Billion Trees programme.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17.     Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

18.     Work programmes were approved in August 2020 and delivery is underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate change impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements. Any changes to the timing of approved projects are unlikely to result in changes to emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the boards. As this is an information only report there are no further impacts identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20.     This report informs the Howick Local Board of the performance for November 2020 to February 2021 inclusive.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21.     Two activities have a direct Maori outcome focus:

a)  Maori Engagement: Improving responsiveness to local Maori Howick
(Arts, Community and Events work programme ID 712)

i)   opportunities were identified for Te Tahawai marae to increase their connection with the wider community as signalled in their strategic plan.

b)  Whakatipu i te reo Māori - we grow the Māori language Celebrating te ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori - Howick
(Libraries work programme ID 1275)

i)   the local board partnership programme between Te Whare o Matariki and Howick Library resumed in November with the Te Kakano themed "Gift of Mamaku" delivered to over 100 people. Waitangi Day promotions featured at each of the boards libraries, recognising the significance of Te Tiriti for all New Zealanders.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22.     This report is provided to enable the Howick Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2020/2021 work programmes. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

23.     Financial performance:

·   revenue is $145,000 below the budget. Leisure facilities have experienced a decrease in visits due to COVID-19 shut down during alert level 3.

·   expenditure of $16,970,000 is below the budget by $894,000. In asset- based services, building and park maintenance services were impacted by COVID-19 shut down. In Locally Driven Initiatives, projects are at various stages of planning and delivery after the disruptions caused by changing alert levels.

·   capital spend is $1,351,000 and is below budget by $905,000. The expenditure is mainly on slip mediation work at Shelly Park Reserve, improving the access way at Pohutukawa Avenue Esplanade Reserve and works on Flat bush water quality ponds.

24.     The Howick Local Board Financial Performance report is provided as Attachment B.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25.     While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g. building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

26.     Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated would be addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section, however as there are none in this report for the Howick Local Board, this section has been omitted.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27.     The local board will receive the next performance update for March 2021 to June 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Howick Nov - Feb 2021 Work Programme Update (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Howick Quarterly Performance Report Feb 2021 Financial Appendix

85

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Phoebe Peguero - Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Draft Statement of Expectations for Council-controlled Organisations

File No.: CP2021/04058

 

  

 

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on the draft Statement of Expectations for council-controlled organisations.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Section 64B in the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) allows for the council to issue a ‘Statement of Expectations’ to its Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs). This is a new power inserted into the Act in late 2019.

3.       The 2020 CCO Review recommended that Council prepare a Statement of Expectations (SOE), to be part of the suite of accountability tools through which Auckland Council provides direction to its CCOs. A Statement of Expectations will provide guidance on how CCOs should undertake their business, as compared to the Accountability Policy contained in the Long-term Plan, which focusses on what CCOs must do. As it will not be part of the Long-term Plan and therefore not subject to the special consultative procedure, it will be easier to amend than the Accountability Policy, as it is refined over time.

4.       Attached to this report is an initial draft of the Statement of Expectations. It is organised to reflect the wording of s64B of the Local Government Act, and is in three sections:

·   conduct of relationships

·   shareholder obligations with which CCOs must act consistently

·   other expectations.

5.       The SOE contains a number of elements which previously were in the Accountability Policy. Therefore, there is some urgency for an initial SOE to be confirmed around the same time as the 10-year Budget/Long-term Plan so that those expectations on CCOs remain in place. Given this, the Statement of Expectations is intended to reflect existing and established practice. This is true of the material in relation to local boards, which re-states and reinforces the shared governance model of Auckland Council and CCOs obligations to local boards within that.

6.       Staff recognise however, that the CCO Review also contained a number of recommendations which are currently being worked on, which will affect how CCOs work within the governance system and with local boards.  It is anticipated therefore that the SOE is likely to be subject to a relatively early revision to take account of these changes.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on the draft Statement of Expectations, prepared in accordance with s64B of the Local Government Act 2002.

Horopaki

Context

7.       In August 2020, the Governing Body received the report of the independent CCO Review.  Among the 64 recommendations, the review panel recommended that Council use section 64B of Local Government Act 2002, which allows local authorities to issue a Statement of Expectations to its CCOs.  The provision states:

64B Statement of expectations

(1) The shareholders in a council-controlled organisation may prepare a statement of expectations that—

(a) specifies how the organisation is to conduct its relationships with—

(i) shareholding local authorities; and

(ii) the communities of those local authorities, including any specified stakeholders within those communities; and

(iii) iwi, hapū, and other Māori organisations; and

(b) requires the organisation to act consistently with—

(i) the statutory obligations of the shareholding local authorities; and

(ii) the shareholders’ obligations pursuant to agreements with third parties (including with iwi, hapū, or other Māori organisations).

(2) A statement of expectations may include other shareholder expectations, such as expectations in relation to community engagement and collaboration with shareholders and others in the delivery of services.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8.       The Statement of Expectations was inserted into the Local Government Act 2002 in 2019 as section 64B. As a relatively new provision, there are few examples around New Zealand as to how it should be used, and how it relates to practices such as letters of expectation, which the council has used in the past to specify its expectations of CCOs. However, the focus of the legislative wording is clearly on behaviours and relationships, rather than the specific activities to be undertaken by CCOs, or the overall governance and accountability regime within which they operate. 

9.       It is also important to be clear about how such an SOE would fit within a wider accountability framework. The intention of this SOE is that it specifies how CCOs should undertake their business and relationships (with the council, communities and other stakeholders), while the Accountability Policy in the Long-term Plan focusses on what CCOs must do. 

10.     As part of the current Long-term Plan process, the Accountability Policy has been revised to exclude the behavioural aspects which previously were included there. These aspects have been included in the Statement of Expectations. It is important that these two accountability tools align and are approved concurrently. 

11.     The SOE is not intended to provide specific protocols of action for CCOs however, or to provide templates (for e.g. statements of intent templates). Material such as that are contained in the CCO Governance Manual, which itself will be revised following approval of the SOE.

12.     As recommended by the CCO review panel, this version of the SOE has been modelled on a similar document in central government, the Treasury Owner’s Expectations Manual, which is designed for state owned enterprises and crown entities. Its content is intended largely to collate existing expectations and policies, rather than introduce new ones at this time. However, as different strategies and practices develop, it is expected that these may be added – or deleted – from the SOE.

13.     Additionally, it is very likely that new ways of working will emerge as other recommendations from the CCO Review are implemented. For example, the local board services team is working with Auckland Transport on options for smaller projects to be promoted more easily.  If this results in a protocol or agreement on how to achieve this, this might be a useful inclusion in a future version of the SOE.

14.     The SOE itself is arranged to closely match the legislative provisions. There are three key sections, which relate to:

·   conduct of relationships.

·   shareholder obligations with which CCOs must act consistently

·   other expectations.

15.     The first section focusses on how CCOs should interact with the council, and what a CCO’s role is. It outlines expectations for how this should happen, and covers things such as good governance, maintaining a public service ethos and providing services efficiently. The SOE provides a significant early section which reinforces the shared governance model operated by Auckland Council, with a key point here being the need to treat local boards not as stakeholders but an equal partner in that governance system.

16.     The second section deals with statutory obligations. This simply restates obligations which CCOs will already be aware of. Consequently, it is relatively short. The second part of this section relates to third parties, and this will require more development before approval in late May, and in subsequent iterations. 

17.     The final section deals with issues of a more specific nature to Auckland Council. This will include some of the issues which have arisen in the last few years and during the CCO Review: executive remuneration, branding, and how to balance public good and commercial goals. We also anticipate this is where issues relating to our revised Māori Responsiveness Strategy (Kia ora Tāmaki Makaurau) will be addressed and reinforced, to the degree they are not already dealt with in the Accountability Policy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     The key expectations of CCOs in respect of climate change are contained in the Accountability Policy (1.1.5) and not the Statement of Expectations. This reflects the complementary nature of the two documents, with the Accountability Policy focussing on what the council expects of CCOs.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     Due to timing imperatives, CCO Boards will be asked to consider the draft at the same time as local board are considering the draft. CCO staff have already been consulted on early drafts, as stakeholders for this work.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20.     This report is to seek local board views on the Statement of Expectations.

21.     The intention of this first iteration of the SOE is to reinforce the expectations entailed in the shared governance model of Auckland Council. In particular, this accords local boards with the critical role as representatives of local communities in the region.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22.     The key expectations of CCOs in respect of Māori outcomes are contained in the Accountability Policy (1.1.1) and not the Statement of Expectations. This reflects the complementary nature of the two documents, with the Accountability Policy focussing on what the council expects of CCOs.

23.     Nonetheless, as the Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau framework is refined and approved (expected in mid-year 2021), we anticipate that additional detail from that framework will be added to the SOE in this area, to reflect the council’s expectations of CCO engagement with Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24.     The Statement of Expectations reflects existing expectations arising from the shared governance of Auckland Council and the arms’ length entity model represented by CCOs. It does not add new policy. It therefore has no financial implications at this time. 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25.     The key risk is that the Statement of Expectations is not approved when it is considered by CCO Oversight Committee in June 2021. Given that some expectations have been taken out of the Accountability Policy and placed in the Statement of Expectations, and that the two documents are intended to work in a complementary fashion, it is important that they are both signed off together. This risk is being mitigated by seeking early feedback from local boards, CCO Boards, and in May holding a workshop with governing body elected members.  This is intended to ensure that a robust draft of the SOE is available for approval in June 2021. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26.     At the same time as this report is being provided to local boards for feedback, we are continuing to develop the statement of expectations with other parts of the Council governance structure. CCOs have been given the opportunity to input to the version which has been provided to local boards. CCO Boards will be considering the SOE at their April meetings. 

27.     It is then intended that the SOE will be presented to the CCO Oversight Committee of Governing Body for final approval at its June 2021 meeting.

28.     It is anticipated that the SOE may be revised again to take account of new expectations arising from implementation of the CCO Review.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Draft Auckland Council Statement of Expectations of substantive Council-controlled organisations, July 2021

95

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Approval for seven new road names for Stages 14, 15A and 15B at the Donegal Glen development in Flat Bush

File No.: CP2021/03403

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Howick Local Board to name four new public roads and two new private roads, being commonly owned access lots (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development in Stages 14, 15A and 15B at the Donegal Glen development in Flat Bush. Approval is also sought to use an existing name for a public road that has been extended from a previously approved subdivision.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council 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.

3.       The developer and applicant, Hugh Green Group, has proposed the names presented in the tables below for consideration by the Howick Local Board. Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki have also suggested names to be used at Road 1 and Road 4 only.

4.       The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the Standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana Whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the Guidelines.

5.       The proposed names for the new public and private roads at Donegal Glen are:

Table One : Donegal Glen ‘Road A’ Extension

Road Reference

Preferred Name

Road A (Extension)

Proposed to extend existing name

Bushfield Drive

 

 

 

 

Table Two: Donegal Glen Stages 14, 15A and 15B Proposed Road Names

Road Reference

Applicant Preferred Name

ROAD 1
Applicant Preferred name 

Tai Manawa Rahi Road
(Name suggested by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki)

ROAD 2

Applicant Preferred name 

Knockanara Drive

ROAD 3

Applicant Preferred name 

Tullymore Drive

ROAD 4

Applicant Preferred name 

Toitu Road

(Name suggested by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki)

COAL 1

Applicant Preferred name 

Brackloon Lane

COAL 2

Applicant Preferred name 

Ballyalton Crescent

Pool of Alternative Names:

These alternative names can be used for ROAD 2 & 3 or COAL 1 & 2 listed in Table 2 above.
See alternative names for ROAD 1 & 4 in Table 3.

Ballykinler Road

Crossgar Road

Ballynahinch Road

Teconnaught Road

Ballyshannon Road

Dundrum Road

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6.       Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki have suggested the following additional options to be used as alternatives for Road 1 and Road 5 only:

Table Three: Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki Proposed Alternative Road Names for Road 1 & 4 only

Road Ref

ALTERNATIVE 1 

ALTERNATIVE 2

ROAD 1

Te Tini Road

Koromeke Street

ROAD 4

Tautika Street

Uru Drive

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      approve the name Bushfield Drive for the new extension (‘Road A’) to an existing public road within Stages 14, 15A and 15B at the Donegal Glen development in Flat Bush, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent reference BUN60356333 and SUB60356335):

b)      approve six names for the following new roads within Stages 14, 15A and 15B at the Donegal Glen development in Flat Bush, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60356333 and SUB60356335):

i)        Road 1: Tai Manawa Rahi Road (Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki suggested name)

ii)       Road 2: Knockanara Drive (applicant preferred name)

iii)      Road 3: Tullymore Drive (applicant preferred name)

iv)      Road 4: Toitu Road (Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki suggested name)

v)      COAL 1: Brackloon Lane (applicant preferred name)

vi)      COAL 2: Ballyalton Crescent (applicant preferred name)

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       Resource consent BUN60356333 (subdivision reference number SUB60356335) was issued in September 2020 for the construction of 126 vacant residential lots, five public roads and two commonly owned access lots (COALs). The subdivision will be undertaken in three stages, which are referred to as Stages 14, 15A and 15B. The development is being marketed as ‘Donegal Glen’ and is due for completion in April.

8.       In accordance with the National Addressing Standards for road naming (the AS/NZS 4819-2011 standard), the COALs require a road name because they serve more than five lots.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The 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 the Auckland Region. 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

11.     The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:

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

·   a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

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

12.     Background and reasoning for proposed names (as described by applicant):

“Greerton Holdings Limited/Hugh Green Limited is wholly owned subsidiaries of the Hugh Green Group. Hugh Green left Ireland in 1949 and created the Green & McCahill Construction Company in Auckland in 1953. The company was responsible for many major New Zealand construction projects from this time through to the 1980’s.

In recent times the company has become more investment focused whilst maintaining its link with the construction industry through development of its land holdings throughout the Auckland region.

A common theme of the company’s land developments is the naming of new roads after places and town lands from Hugh Green’s native Ireland and more specifically County Donegal in Ireland’s northwest.

This is consistent with our recently developed Donegal Glen stage 7 at 40 Hughs Way which was completed in December 2015 and includes the street names Casheltown Way, Banrsmore Road, Ballykerrigan Road, Drumbuoy Drive, Creggan Crescent, Clogfin Place, Drumfad Road and Mullafin Road – all named after places in Donegal. We note the adjacent development has continued this same road name theme.

Donegal Glen Stages 1 - 6 at 89 Flat Bush School Road which was completed in 2014, this development includes the street names Castlederg Drive, Kiltole Drive, Moville Drive and Cranford Drive, Bruckless Drive, Castletown Drive and Dunkineely Drive etc.

Point View Park subdivision at 132 Flat Bush School Road (opposite 89 Flat Bush School Road) which was completed in 2009. This development includes the street names Arranmore Drive, Coolaghy Drive, Clady Drive, Listack Place, Gortnest Place, Greeve Place and Kerrykeel Drive – all named after places in Donegal.

Similarly, we have completed developments at the corner of Thomas and Chapel Roads (1998 – 2004). These subdivisions include the street names Donegal Park Drive, Carrick Glen Avenue, Liscooley Drive, Drumbeg Close, Dunaff Place, etc.

As a professional developer, Hugh Green Group wishes to retain an identity with the land long after it has been constructed and communities have been established. The only opportunity to leave an erstwhile mark on the development is by our selection of the street names. The land in this instance has been retained and farmed by the Hugh Green Group of companies since 1996.”

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

Table Four: Applicant’s proposed names and meanings

Road Reference

Proposed Name

Meaning

ROAD 1

Tai Manawa Rahi Road
(Name suggested by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki)

‘Tai’ is for Ngāi Tai, giving mana to our ancestral connection to the whenua within the footprint of the development. ‘Manawa Rahi’ means unwavering, resolute, persistent, and dedicated. This name speaks to the nature of Ngāi Tai today, committed to achieving great outcomes for Ngāi Tai now and future generations.

ROAD 2

Knockanara Drive

(Applicant Preferred)

These proposed names come from Hugh Green Limited’s native Ireland and more specifically County Donegal in Ireland’s northwest. The company have developed other sites in the area, with roads which are all also named after towns of County Donegal. The proposed names are in line with this established theme in the local area.

ROAD 3

Tullymore Drive

(Applicant Preferred)

ROAD 4

Toitu Road

(Name suggested by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki)

Often used in a proverb “Toitū te whenua, whatungarongaro te tangata”, which means – the permanence of the land while the people disappear.

This name for Ngāi Tai means that while people come and go, Ngāi Tai and its whenua remains.

COAL 1

Brackloon Lane

(Applicant Preferred)

These proposed names come from Hugh Green Limited’s native Ireland and more specifically County Donegal in Ireland’s northwest. The company have developed other sites in the area, with roads which are all also named after towns of County Donegal. The proposed names are in line with this established theme in the local area.

COAL 2

Ballyalton Crescent

(Applicant Preferred)

14.     The Applicant has also provided a pool of names that can be use as alternatives for ROAD 2 & 3 or COAL 1 & 2 only:

Table Five: Applicant’s alternative names and meanings

Pool of alternatives to be used at ROAD 2 & 3 or COAL 1 & 2 only

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Ballykinler Road

The proposed names come from Hugh Green Limited’s native Ireland and more specifically County Donegal in Ireland’s northwest. The proposed names are in line with this established theme in the local area.

Ballynahinch Road

Ballyshannon Road

Crossgar Road

Teconnaught Road

Dundrum Road

15.     Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki have suggested the following additional options to be used as alternatives for Road 1 and Road 5 only:

Table Six: Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki’s alternative names for Road 1 and Road 5.

Road Reference

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki)

ROAD 1

Te Tini Road

(First alternative)

The many (not pronounced as in Tiny). Ngāi Tai have whakapapa connections to arrivals to Tāmaki Makaurau known as Te Tini o Toi, Te Tini o Maruiwi and others.

Koromeke Street

(Second alternative)

Loop, descriptive of the layout of the road.

ROAD 4

Tautika Street

(First alternative)

to be even, equal.

Uru Drive

(Second alternative)

a name used to describe a Chief or leader, this is so because it is descriptive of a grove of trees, likely to be very tall and so their prominence is given as an expression of a Chief or Leader.

16.     All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity. It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

17.     Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

18.     All the road types are acceptable for the new public and private roads, suiting the form and layout of the roads, as per the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

19.     Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

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 decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23.     To aid local board decision making, the Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate. The Guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

24.     On the 7 September 2020, mana whenua were contacted by the council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

·   Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

·   Ngāti Tamaoho

·   Te Ākitai Waiohua

·   Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

·   Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

·   Ngāti Paoa

·   Ngāti Maru

·   Ngāti Tamaterā

·   Waikato-Tainui

·   Ngāti Whanaunga

·   Te Patukirikiri

25.     Ngati Tamaoho did not support the names proposed by the applicant, however they noted that they would support any name put forward by the resident Mana Whenua.

26.     Ngati Paoa Trust Board advised they would be suggesting Maori names as tangata whenua occupied the land long before 1996. However, six months on, no further responses or names were received.

27.     Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki opposed the applicant’s names, as well as objecting to the suggestion from Ngati Paoa Trust Board that they would suggest names for this subdivision. Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki further commenting “With respect to mana whenua, within the area of the development Ngāi Tai do not recognise Ngāti Paoa or any other iwi as having mana whenua status over and above that of Ngāi Tai”.

28.     Following subsequent engagement between Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki and the applicant, an agreement was made where Hugh Green Group would name four roads and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki would offer names for two roads. On the 4 February 2021, six names were received by Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki for Road 1 and Road 4. The applicant has included Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki’s two preferred names in their proposal (refer to Table Two and Table Four), with the remaining four alternative names for Road 1 and Road 4 included in Table Three and Table Six for the local board’s consideration.

29.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30.     The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the council.

31.     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

32.     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

33.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site Plan

113

b

Location map

115

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Approval to rename five new roads in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush

File No.: CP2021/03615

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Howick Local Board to rename five new public roads in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for road names. The guidelines state that the renaming of roads is strongly discouraged unless there are compelling issues or reasons to support a change, including redesigns of roads, changes in traffic flow, and mail or service delivery issues. The redesign and road layout changes to Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development meet the criteria for renaming the roads.

3.       On 18 May 2020, the Howick Local Board approved the names ‘Southridge Road’ (for ROAD 3), ‘Morena Street’ (for ROAD 6), ‘Grand Ridge Avenue’ (for ROAD 7), and ‘Ridgehill Rise’ (for COAL 1) (Resolution: HW/2020/59).

4.       Subsequently, a variation to the Stage 2 Bremner Ridge development was approved by the council on 1 March 2021 (Auckland Council reference number BUN60361650) and that saw a road layout redesign, specifically removing ROAD 6 and COAL 1, changing the southern sections of ROAD 3 and ROAD 7, and creating two new roads (referred to as ‘ROAD 14’ and ‘ROAD 16’). The previous and current road layouts are shown in Attachment A.

5.       Rather than finding new names for the new roads, the developer and applicant, BR Land Co Ltd c/o Development Advisory Services Ltd, and agent Maven Associates, proposes to relocate the already approved names Southridge Road’ to ROAD 3 and ROAD 14, ‘Grand Ridge Avenue’ to ROAD 7, and ‘Ridgehill Rise’ to ROAD 16 and ROAD 17.

6.       These changes would require the recission of resolution HW/2020/59 so that the names can be used along the new roads. The recission of Morena Street’ is also requested so this name is available to use at a future stage. No Stage 2 properties would be affected by this change as no dwellings have been constructed there yet, however addresses will need to be allocated for service provision.

7.       The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the Standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity.

8.       The proposed names for the new public roads at Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development are:

Table One: Proposed names and their reallocation

Road Reference

Previously approved name to be reallocated

ROAD 3 & ROAD 14

Southridge Road

ROAD 7

Grand Ridge Avenue

ROAD 16 & 17

Ridgehill Rise

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      rescind resolution HW/2020/59 to name the public road (ROAD 3) Southridge Road’ in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

b)      rescind resolution HW/2020/59 to name the public road (ROAD 6) Morena Street’ in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

c)      rescind resolution HW/2020/59 to name the public road (ROAD 7) ‘Grand Ridge Avenue’ in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

d)      rescind resolution HW/2020/59 to name the public road (COAL 1) ‘Ridgehill Rise’ in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

e)      approve the name Southridge Road for the two public roads (ROAD 3 and ROAD 14) in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

f)       approve the name Grand Ridge Avenue for the public road (ROAD 7) in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

g)      approve the name Ridgehill Rise for the public roads (ROAD 16 and ROAD 17) in Stage 2 of the Bremner Ridge development in Flat Bush (Council reference BUN60082683 and SUB60300672), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki

Context

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

10.     Resource consent BUN60082683 (subdivision reference number SUB60300672) was issued in March 2017 for the construction of 313 new lots which is to be done in 2 stages. Sixteen new public roads and four new commonly owned access lots (COALs) are to be constructed to service these lots. A variation to the Stage 2 Bremner Ridge development was approved by Council on 1 March 2021 (Council reference number BUN60361650) for changes to Stage 2 subdivision conditions, as well as the road layout.

11.     ROAD 7 will now extend slightly further south to replace ROAD 6. It is proposed that the already approved name ‘Grand Ridge Avenue’ will extend along the new stretch of road.

12.     Two new public roads have been created, which are proposed to be continuations of two existing roads.

·   ROAD 14 will be a continuation of ROAD 3, with the previously approved name ‘Southridge Road’ to extend along the two roads

·   COAL 1 has been removed and replaced with a new public road (ROAD 16). ROAD 16 will be a continuation of ROAD 17, with the previously approved name ‘Ridgehill Rise’ to extend along the two roads.

13.     As these are previously approved road names, consultation with the wider community and mana whenua is not required.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14.     The 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 the Auckland Region. 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

15.     The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:

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

·   a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

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

16.     Theme of development (as described by applicant):

“The master plan for Bremner Ridge has been designed around a green network of natural native bush. We envision the character of Bremner Ridge will inherit the casual rural aesthetic that the site possessed prior to its development. The architecture and landscape design will be inspired by elements commonly found in the countryside including sheds, cottages, post and batten fences, and greenery. Bremner Ridge also has the highest vantage point of all residential developments in Flat Bush, East Auckland. Therefore, the ridgeline and views are emphasised across the theme of the development.”

Table Two: Proposed names and their meanings

Road number

Proposed Name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

ROAD 3 & 14

Southridge Road
(Applicant Preferred)

Located on the southern ridge of development.

ROAD 7

Grand Ridge Avenue
(Applicant Preferred)

Reference to the theme of the development

ROAD 16 & 17

Ridgehill Rise
(Applicant Preferred)

Reference to the topography of the development.

17.     All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity. It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

18.     Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

19.     The road types used are acceptable road types, suiting the form and layout of the public roads.

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 decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23.     As no new road names are proposed, consultation with mana whenua was not undertaken in this instance.

24.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

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 the council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site Plan

121

b

Location Map

123

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Proposal to amend the 2019-2022 Howick Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2021/02246

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To propose amendments to the Howick Local Board meeting schedule for the remainder of the 2019-2022 electoral term.

Whakarāpopototanga ma tua

Executive summary

2.       Options to review the current meeting schedule for the remainder of the 2019-2022 Howick Local Board term was raised by the Chair with the Board. Context has been provided as Attachment A and Attachment B.

3.       Options discussed included either:

a)  changing the business meeting day and time to Thursdays at 2pm from Mondays at 6pm; or

b)  maintain the status quo of Mondays at 6pm.

4.       Previous advice presented to the board at the beginning of the electoral term included:

a)  dedicate one day per week to local board business between Tuesday and Thursday

b)  start the business meeting during business hours.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      amend the meeting schedule outlined below for the remainder of the 2019-2022 electoral term:

Year

Date

2021

2pm, Thursday 6 May

2pm, Thursday 20 May

2pm, Thursday 24 June

2pm, Thursday 22 July

2pm, Thursday 19 August

2pm, Thursday 23 September

2pm, Thursday 21 October

2pm, Thursday 18 November

2pm, Thursday 9 December

2022

2pm, Thursday 24 February

2pm, Thursday 24 March

2pm, Thursday 21 April

2pm, Thursday 19 May

2pm, Thursday 23 June

2pm, Thursday 21 July

2pm, Thursday 18 August

2pm, Thursday 22 September

b)      maintain the status quo and continue meeting on Monday’s at 6pm.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Context to the proposal to amend the 2019-2022 Howick Local  Board meeting schedule

127

b

Work Practices Recommendations to local boards for the Oct 2019 to 2022 Electoral Term

129

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ian Milnes - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Workshop records

File No.: CP2021/00046

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       This item attaches the workshop records taken for the period stated below.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Under Standing Order 12.1 workshop records shall record the names of members attending and a statement summarising the nature of the information received, and nature of matters discussed.  No resolutions are passed, or decisions reached but are solely for the provision of information and discussion.

3.       This report attaches the workshop records for the period stated below.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the workshop records for workshops held on 4, 11, 18 and 25 March 2021 and included as attachments to the agenda report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Workshop record 4 March 2021

153

b

Workshop record 11 March 2021

155

c

Workshop record 18 March 2021

157

d

Workshop record 25 March 2021

159

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

Governance forward work calendar

File No.: CP2021/00036

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the Howick Local Board with its updated governance forward work calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The governance forward work calendar for the Howick Local Board is in Attachment A. The calendar is updated monthly, reported to meetings and distributed to council staff.

3.       The governance forward work calendars were introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme and aim to support local boards’ governance role by:

·   ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by local board priorities;

·   clarifying what advice is expected and when; and

·   clarifying the rationale for reports.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the governance forward work calendar included as Attachment A of the agenda report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Governance forward work calendar

163

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 


Howick Local Board

19 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator 



[1]    For example, local parks, reserves, civic spaces, footpaths and roads.

[2]    Markets and stalls, mobile shops, outdoor dining, fundraising, hire of recreational equipment, distribution of promotional goods and materials, street performance (including busking and pavement art), micromobility and outdoor display of goods.

[3] Trading and Events in Public Places Guidelines 2015, Shared Spaces Guidelines 2017 and Auckland Film Protocol.

[4] Reserves Act, Trespass Act, Fair Trading Act, Resource Management Act, Unitary Plan, Customer Guarantees Act, Road User Rule, Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act, Electricity (Safety) Regulations, Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw, Signage Bylaw.

[5] Local board representatives were Troy Churton (Ōrākei Local Board) and Sandra Coney (Waitākere Ranges Local Board)

[6] Include reference to the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act, Reserves Act, requirements for landowner approvals, rules around the use of drones; consider the effects of activities on the environment and its wildlife, a more explicit definition of an event and exemptions for whānau gatherings or children to sell ice-cream or lemonade in front of their houses.