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

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday 28 April 2021

4.30pm

Local Board Chambers
Papakura Service Centre
35 Coles Crescent
Papakura

 

Papakura Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Brent Catchpole

Deputy Chairperson

Jan Robinson

Members

Felicity Auva'a

 

George Hawkins

 

Keven Mealamu

 

Sue Smurthwaite

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Paula Brooke

Democracy Advisor

 

21 April 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 021 715 279

Email: Paula.Brooke@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Papakura Local Board

28 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     Deputation -  Zonta Club proposal                                                                     5

8.2     Deputation -  Middlemore Foundation                                                               6

8.3     Deputation -  Papakura Normal School                                                             6

8.4     Deputation -  Fletcher Living                                                                              6

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Governing Body Member's Update                                                                              9

12        Chairperson's Update                                                                                                 11

13        Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Plan 2021                                    13

14        Approval for a new public road name at 131 Grove Road, Papakura                   27

15        Approval for five new public road names at 30-40 Hayfield Way, Hingaia           37

16        Papakura Senior Citizens Hall - Transfer of assets to Auckland Council             43

17        Libraries and Service Centre integration                                                                  51

18        Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme                                                     55

19        Proposal to make a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw                                   61

20        Draft Statement of Expectations for Council-controlled Organisations               67

21        Statement of proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw and controls  83

22        Public feedback on proposal to make new navigation rules                                  89

23        Review of the Code of Conduct - draft revised code                                               95

24        Auckland Council's Performance Report - Papakura Local Board for November 202 to February 2021                                                                                                        101

25        For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board                         149

26        Papakura Local Board Achievements Register 2019-2022 Political Term          151

27        Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - March 2021       165

28        Papakura Local Board Workshop Records                                                            173

29        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Welcome

 

A board member will lead the meeting in prayer.

 

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 Papakura Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting held on Wednesday 24 March 2021, as true and correct.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Papakura Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Deputation -  Zonta Club proposal

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Iris Durney, member of the advocacy committee for the Zonta Club, will speak to the club’s proposal to install notices to advertise contacts for women regarding domestic violence.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      thank Iris Durney from the Zonta Club for her presentation.

 

 

8.2       Deputation -  Middlemore Foundation

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Lyle Smith and Sandra Geange, from the Middlemore Foundation, will speak to the activities of the foundation.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      thank Lyle Smith and Sandra Geange from the Middlemore Foundation for their presentation.

 

 

8.3       Deputation -  Papakura Normal School

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.   Derek Linington, Principal of Papakura Normal School, will speak to the school’s request for repair work to be completed on the open ditch on the school boundary at Walters Road.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      thank Derek Linington, Principal of Papakura Normal School, for his presentation.

 

 

8.4       Deputation -  Fletcher Living

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.   Darren Soo and Priya Kim, from Fletcher Living, will speak to a new playground at Waiata Shores.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      thank Darren Soo and Priya Kim, from Fletcher Living, for speaking to a new playground at Waiata Shores.

 

 

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.”


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Governing Body Member's Update

File No.: CP2021/03578

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Manurewa and Papakura ward councillors to update the board on Governing Body issues they have been involved with since the previous meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Standing Orders 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 provides for Governing Body members to update their local board counterparts on regional matters of interest to the board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive Councillor Angela Dalton and Councillor Daniel Newman’s updates.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Chairperson's Update

File No.: CP2021/03579

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Papakura Local Board Chairperson to update the local board on issues he has been involved in over the past month.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal report from the Papakura Local Board Chairperson.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Autho

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Plan 2021

File No.: CP2021/04439

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to outline the outcomes of the proposed Regional Land Transport Plan (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 Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the Auckland Transport – Regional Land Transport Plan 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, 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 plan is set out in the 2018 RLTP. This saw the introduction of the Regional Fuel Tax (RFT), that provided an additional $1.5bn 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 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 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% of the available funding from 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 the Planning Committee unanimously endorsed the draft RLTP.  ATAP itself was released on Friday 12 March. 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:

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:

Date

LB Engagement

15 Feb

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 slot 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 $20M per annum for the next ten years. On this basis the proposed RLTP includes $200M for Local Board initiatives. However, it should be noted that this is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5%.

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 Papakura Local Board area.

#

AT Projects

Duration

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

33

Eastern Busway

2021/22 - 2025/26

873.9

43

Airport to Botany Stage 2 Bus Improvements

2023/24 - 2025/26

30.1

44

Ormiston Town Centre Link

2021/22 - 2022/23

16.8

49

Papakura Rail Station Park and Ride           

2021/22 - 2024/25

9.9

52

Drury Local Road Improvements

2027/28 - 2030/31

242.8

71

CRL Day One – Level Crossing Removal

2021/22 - 2026/27

220.0

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 Papakura.

#

Project from a Programme

Underlying Programme

47

Manurewa (Coxhead Quadrant)

Safety (AT)

48

Popes Porchester Intersection

Safety (AT)

54

Pukekohe Dual Signals (Manukau / Massey / King / Stadium and East / Stadium)

Network Performance (AT)

55

Waiuku Road corridor (Colombo Road to Domain Road)

Safety (AT)

70

Takanini School Road / Manuroa Road Intersection

Safety (AT)

78

Residential Speed Management – Manurewa

Safety (AT)

19.     The below table summarizes 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 Papakura.

 

Non-AT Projects

Responsible Agency

10 Year Capital Expenditure ($M)

41

Wiri to Quay Park

KiwiRail

209.0

46

Mill Road Corridor

Waka Kotahi

1,354.0

50

State Highway 1 Papakura to Drury South

Waka Kotahi

423.0

51

Drury Stations

KiwiRail

185.0

53

Papakura to Pukekohe Electrification

KiwiRail

338.0

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

21.    The below table outlines objectives from the local board plan that are approached in the RLTP

Objectives

RLTP outcomes

Papkura’s cycleways and walkways provide safe, connected, alternative routes

The RLTP includes:

·    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.

·    $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.

It also has a ten-year investment of $3.93billion 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

Public transport is safe, convenient, reliable and affordable

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 programme will also make significant progress towards decarbonising Auckland’s public transport fleet by:

·    Electrifying the rail line to Pukekohe, enabling disposal of Auckland’s remaining diesel passenger trains

·    Funding acceleration of the Low Emissions Bus Roadmap to ensure half of Auckland’s bus fleet is low emissions by 2031

·    Emissions from ferries make up a disproportionately high amount (19 percent) of total emissions from the public transport fleet. Noting that technology is less mature in the development of low emissions ferries, this draft RLTP allocates $30 million to start decarbonisation of the ferry fleet and reduce diesel emissions covered under bus, ferry and multimodal improvements.

It also includes projects such as:

·    $35million for supporting Electric Vehicles

·    $20million for environmental sustainability infrastructure

·    $9million for electric bus trial roadmap

 

Our urban roads are safe and free from congestion

The ATAP process identified support for brownfields development as the highest priority for growth investment.

This includes $401 million, with a further $100 million to come direct from Central Government, to support the Auckland Housing Programme in brownfield areas. This will provide for public transport and walking and cycling infrastructure in these areas to encourage sustainable transport behaviour, along with intersection upgrades to minimise impact on the operation of the surrounding road network.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22.     The approach set out in the RLTP conforms with the direction expressed by 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 the 15th February 2021

·   A workshop with the Papakura Local Board on the 7th April 2021

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

31.    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

32.     AT’s capital programme within the RLTP is contingent on the Mayor’s proposed rates increase of 5%. If this is not adopted there will be significant impacts on plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33.     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

Regional Land Transport Programme feedback template

21

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas – Elected Member Relationship Partner, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Hamish Bunn - GM Investment, Planning & Policy, Auckland Transport

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Approval for a new public road name at 131 Grove Road, Papakura 

File No.: CP2021/02671

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Papakura Local Board to name a new public road, being vested on deposit in Auckland Council, created by way of a subdivision development at 131 Grove Road, Papakura.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1.       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.

2.       On behalf of the developer and applicant, Kerry Addis, agent, Mitchell Holyoake of Maven Associates Ltd have proposed the names presented below for consideration by the Local Board.

3.       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.

4.       The proposed names for the new public road at 131 Grove Road, Papakura are:

·    Te Rauroha Street (Applicant Preferred)

·    Te Paepaetahi Street (Alternative 1)

·    Major Street (Alternative 2)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      approve the name Te Rauroha Street (applicant’s preferred name) for the new public road created by way of subdivision at 131 Grove Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60352595 and SUB60352597 & SUB60351180-A).

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       Resource consent reference BUN60352595 (subdivision reference number SUB60352597 & SUB60351180-A) was issued in November 2020 for the construction of 22 new residential freehold allotments, one public road extension (Kaha Road) and one new public road.

6.       Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A and Attachment B to this report.

7.       In accordance with the Standards, any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

8.       Therefore, in this development, the new public road requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the road that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

9.       The six new residential allotments (Lots 7-9 and Lots 20-22) facing the new road extension will have street numbers allocated off of Kaha Road, as they can be accessed directly from that road.

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.     The proposed names have been chosen with a military theme and all names were sent through to consult all mana whenua by the applicant on 15th January 2021 for consideration and consultation:

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Te Rauroha Street

(Applicant preferred)

Te Rauroha is a major Ngati Paoa chief that is recognised by a Government report from 1862 for retaining their loyalty to the Crown. This name was recommended by Harley Wade from Ngati Paoa Iwi Trust.

Te Paepaetahi Street

(Alternative 1)

Te Paepaetahi is a ridge near the Wairoa river where there is a look-out place (okiokinga) still known as Te Paepaetahi, whence can be seen the waters of the Papakura creek Pahurihuri or better known as Pahurehure.

This name was recommended by Harley Wade from Ngati Paoa Iwi Trust.

Major Street

(Alternative 2)

Major is an army rank, which suits the military theme. It is chosen by the applicant to fit in the military theme.

 

13.     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.

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

15.     ‘Street’ is an acceptable road type for the new public road, suiting the form and layout of the road.

16.     Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) and 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

17.     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

18.     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

19.     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

20.     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.

21.     On 15 January 2021 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

·    Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust)

·    Ngāti Maru (Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Trust)

·    Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

·    Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

·    Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

·    Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

·    Ngāti Whanaunga (Ngāti Whanaunga Incorporated)

·    Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua (Makaurau Marae Māori Trust)

·    Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

·    Waikato – Tainui (Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated)

·    Ngāti Tamaoho

·    Te Kawerau a Maki (Te Kawerau Iwi Settlement Trust & Tribal Authority)

22.     By the close of the consultation period, responses were received from Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Tamaoho, Waikato – Tainui, Te Ākitai Waiohua and Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust).

Waikato – Tainui withdrew from the discussion and agreed to support Mana Whenua to take the lead role.

Harley Wade from Ngati Paoa Iwi Trust responded to the consultation request and recommended names, two of which have been chosen to use on this development.

Mike Baker from Ngaati Whanaunga initially advised that further cultural consideration would be necessary. The agent has subsequently followed up with Mr Baker, with the most recent follow-up email being sent on 8th March 2021, however no subsequent response has been received from Mr Baker or Ngaati Whanaunga.

Kowhai Olsen from Te Ākitai Waiohua has advised that they supported any recommendation from Ngati Tamaoho, as they are the active kaitiaki of the rohe.

Ben Leonard from Ngati Tamaoho Trust has advised the agent that they would undertake an internal check to make sure all proposed names were acceptable. The agent has subsequently followed up with Mr Leonard a number of times, with the most recent email being sent on 8 March 2021, however no further response has been received from Mr Leonard or Ngati Tamaoho Trust.

23.     In this instance the developer has made genuine and ongoing attempts to obtain feedback from both Ngaati Whanaunga and Ngati Tamaoho with no success. Ngati Paoa Iwi Trust has responded with additional names, that the developer has agreed to use at this location.

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 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

Location map

33

b

Site Plan

35

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Approval for five new public road names at 30-40 Hayfield Way, Hingaia 

File No.: CP2021/03737

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Papakura Local Board to name five new public roads, created by way of a subdivision development at 30-40 Hayfield Way, Hingaia.

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.       On behalf of the developer and applicant, Parklands Properties Limited, agent Nigel Noma of HP Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the Local Board.

4.       The proposed road 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, as suggested by Ngāti Tamaoho and adopted by the Applicant for the new public roads at 30-40 Hayfield Way are:

 

Road Reference

Applicant Preferred name

ROAD 1

Pātakatuna Drive

ROAD 2

Umutī Lane

ROAD 3

Te Ipukai Drive

ROAD 4

Kāuru Way

ROAD 5

Mātaitai Way

Alternative Names

This alternative name can be used for any the public roads listed above, to be used with the corresponding road suffix as above.es:

Kaitī

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      approve five names for the following new public roads created by way of subdivision at 30-40 Hayfield Way, Hingaia in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60077878 and SUB60239503):

I)            Public Road 1: Pātakatuna Drive

II)           Public Road 2: Umutī Lane

III)          Public Road 3: Te Ipukai Drive

IV)          Public Road 4: Kāuru Way

V)           Public Road 5: Mātaitai Way.

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       Resource consent reference BUN60077878 (subdivision reference number SUB60239503) was issued in September 2017 for the construction of 69 new residential freehold units, seven super lots to be comprehensively developed at a later date (through a separate resource consent process), two public reserves, a public pedestrian accessway and five public roads.

7.       All road names have been suggested by Ngāti Tamaoho.

8.       In accordance with the Standards, any road including, private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

9.       Therefore, as all roads are public roads they require names. 

10.     Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A to this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11.     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

12.     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.

13.     Theme: The Applicant approached Ngāti Tamaoho to assist in finding suitable names for this development. All names proposed have been suggested by Ngāti Tamaoho and adopted by the Applicant.

14.     The Applicant’s proposed names and meanings (as translated by Ngāti Tamaoho) are set out in the table below:


 

 

Road number

Proposed Name

Meaning (as described and translated by Ngāti Tamaoho)

ROAD 1

Pātakatuna Drive

Referring to the Pātaka-tuna that stood here. Pātaka = storehouse, tuna = eels

ROAD 2

Umutī Lane

Owing to the large number of Umu-tī found nearby. Umu = earth oven, tī = cabbage tree

ROAD 3

Te Ipukai Drive

Referring to this area's use for storing food

ROAD 4

Kāuru Way

The edible tap root of the tī (cabbage tree) that were cooked here

ROAD 5

Mātaitai Way

Referring to this area's use for processing shellfish

Alternative Name

Kaitī

Referring to the areas use for cooking tī (cabbage tree)

 

15.     Assessment: 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.

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

17.     Road Type: ‘Drive’, ‘Lane’ and ‘Way’ are acceptable road types for the new public roads, suiting the form and layout of the road.

18.     Consultation: 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

19.     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

20.     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

21.     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

22.     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.

23.     The Applicant engaged extensively with Ngāti Tamaoho to find suitable names for this development. Ben Leonard of Ngāti Tamaoho suggested all names proposed.

24.     Ngāti Tamaoho has a very strong linkage to the area, and the suggested names refer to the local area. No other iwi groups have been consulted.

25.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua and only Te Reo Māori names are proposed.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29.     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 & Location Plans - 30-40 Hayfield Way, Hingaia

41

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrea Muhme - Planner

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Papakura Senior Citizens Hall - Transfer of assets to Auckland Council

File No.: CP2021/02681

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To formalise Papakura Local Board feedback to Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee regarding declining the transfer of Papakura Senior Citizens Hall.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Papakura Senior Citizens Club (the club) own the Senior Citizens Hall (the hall) and land at 8 East Street, Papakura.  The club wound up in December 2020 and under the rules in their Deed of Incorporation the club will transfer their assets to Auckland Council. There is also a caveat on the title in favour of Auckland Council.

3.       Auckland Council is not obliged to accept the transfer of assets.  If the transfer of assets is accepted, they will be held in trust subject to s140 and s141 of the Local Government Act 2002.  This restricts the use (to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas) and any future disposal (proceeds to be used to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas).

4.       Auckland Council has significant financial constraints as outlined in the draft Recovery Budget 2021-2031.  It states that our current community asset base is financially, socially and culturally unsustainable.

5.       Options have been considered relating to the transfer of assets to Auckland Council. To meet the intent of the club’s Deed of Incorporation, all options should benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas:

Option 1: Accept transfer of assets and manage hall for benefit of older people

Option 2: Accept transfer, sell assets and use/distribute funding for benefit of older people

Option 3: Decline transfer of assets

Managed by council or third party/lease but must specifically benefit older people so utilisation may be limited

Proceeds of sale could be used on a council project e.g. Haumaru Housing or a specific grants round could be held for organisations that work with older people

The club have indicated they would sell the hall and distribute the proceeds of sale to charitable groups to benefit older people in Papakura

 

6.       The recommended option is option 3, decline the transfer of assets as:

·    there is no need for additional hall/venue for hire space in Papakura.  There are other council owned facilities with capacity for more bookings and activities

·    the hall is in poor condition

·    there is no funding for renewals and ongoing operating expenses.  The estimated cost to bring the hall up to standard is $400,000.  Estimated operating expenditure of $33,000 per annum would be required for maintenance, cleaning and utilities.  Additional operating expenditure could be required to manage the hall to ensure it specifically benefits older people.  Reprioritisation of existing projects and renewals would be required to fund the investment required for the assets.

7.       The club would like a decision on the transfer of assets as soon as possible.  The Papakura Local Board discussed the options on 10 March 2021 and understands the current financial situation outlined in the Recovery Budget 2021-2031 and lack of funding to bring the hall up to standard and ongoing operating costs.

8.       The main risk of the recommended option is the perception of a missed opportunity for the council to benefit older people in Papakura.  This can be mitigated by the club distributing the proceeds of sale to charitable groups who will benefit older people in Papakura.

9.       The next step is a report to Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in May 2021 to consider whether the hall is required for service or whether to decline the transfer of assets.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      recommend to Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee to decline the transfer of Papakura Senior Citizens Hall to Auckland Council, noting that

i)        there is no need for additional hall/venue for hire space as there is capacity for more bookings and activities in other council owned facilities in Papakura

ii)       the hall is in poor condition with weathertightness, internal guttering and fire safety system issues

iii)      there are significant financial constraints outlined in the draft Recovery Budget 2021-2031 with no funding available to bring the hall up to standard or for ongoing renewals and operating costs

iv)      there is support for the Papakura Senior Citizens Club to distribute the proceeds of sale to charitable groups to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas

b)      recommend to Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee to approve the withdrawal of Caveat 073463.1 subject to Auckland Council staff confirming there are no ongoing requirements arising from the Deed and Bond.

Horopaki

Context

Papakura Senior Citizens Club requires a decision on the transfer of their assets

10.     Papakura Senior Citizens Club (the club) owns the Senior Citizens Hall (the hall) and land at 8 East Street, Papakura.  The club has offered entertainment, socialising and activities for older people from the hall since they acquired it in 1968.  The building was known as the Manchester Unity Hall prior to the club’s acquisition.

A picture containing sky, outdoor

Description automatically generated

11.     Papakura Local Board and predecessors have supported the club with rates relief on the property since 1968.  

12.     In 1973, the club updated the rules in their Deed of Incorporation regarding winding up their operations: 

In the event of the winding up of the Club the assets of the Club after payment of all just debts and expenses shall be paid and transferred to the Papakura Borough Council or such other Local Body as shall at the time of dissolution be exercising jurisdiction over the area now know [sic] as Papakura Borough on trust to be used for the benefit of elderly residents of Papakura and neighbouring districts. 

13.     The rules mean that assets would be held in trust by the council specifically to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas.  

14.     In 1974, a caveat referring to a Deed and Bond was registered on the title in favour of Papakura Borough Council forbidding the registration of any Memorandum of Transfer or other instrument until the caveat is withdrawn.  This means the club cannot sell the hall unless Auckland Council agrees to lift the caveat on the title. Staff are investigating the Deed and Bond reference to compliance with parking requirements. 

15.     The club wound up in December 2020 and require a decision on the transfer of assets to Auckland Council or the lifting of the caveat on the title to allow them to sell the hall to others. 

Auckland Council is not obliged to accept the transfer of assets

16.     The council does not have a legal obligation to accept the transfer of assets.

17.     If the council accepts the transfer of assets, s140 and s141 of the Local Government Act 2002 include provisions that restrict the use and disposal of property vested in trust.  For the Papakura Senior Citizens Hall, this means: 

·    the hall must be used for the benefit of older people in Papakura and neighbouring districts

·    additional or different uses of the hall would require permission from the relevant Minister in writing.  The process would include a letter to the Minister setting out the context and the rationale for the change of use, ideally indicating support from the club.  There is no guarantee of timeframes or outcome

·    the hall can be sold and proceeds of sale used for the benefit of older people in Papakura and neighbouring districts.  The club would need to be given a reasonable opportunity to comment on the intended sale.     

Auckland Council has significant financial constraints as outlined in the Recovery Budget 2021-2031

18.     The Recovery Budget 2021-2031 outlines that our current community asset base is financially, socially and culturally unsustainable and proposes a move away from a focus on assets to alternative ways of delivering services through partnerships, digital channels and multi-use facilities.  Over the first three years of the Recovery Budget is it proposed to focus on existing assets rather than acquiring or building new assets.

The decision maker is the Governing Body

19.     As the hall is not currently owned by the council, accepting the transfer of assets is an unbudgeted acquisition.  Acquisitions are a Governing Body decision. The decision-making process is:

·    Papakura Local Board provide their feedback and recommendation

·    Parks, Arts, Community and Events (PACE) Committee consider whether the service is required in terms of strategy and policy decision making that relates to social, community and cultural activities.  If PACE resolve to decline the transfer of assets, no further decisions are sought

·    If PACE supports the transfer of assets, Finance and Performance Committee must resolve whether to approve the acquisition and allocate funding for ongoing operating, maintenance and renewals of the hall.   

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

All options should benefit older people in Papakura 

20.     Three high level options have been considered for the transfer of Papakura Senior Citizens Hall.  To meet the intent of the club’s Deed of Incorporation, all options should benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas either through the provision of hall services or projects/services provided by others.  Table 1 outlines the options and factors for consideration.

 

Table 1: Options for the transfer of Papakura Senior Citizens Hall

Factor

Option 1: Accept transfer of assets and manage hall for benefit of older people

Option 2: Accept transfer, sell assets and use/distribute funding for benefit of older people

Option 3: Decline transfer of assets

Managed by council or third party/lease but must specifically benefit older people

Proceeds of sale could be used on a council project e.g. Haumaru Housing or a specific grants round could be held for organisations that work with older people

The club have indicated they would sell the hall and distribute the proceeds of sale to charitable groups to benefit older people in Papakura

Cost

Estimated OPEX cost of $33,000 per annum for hall maintenance, cleaning and utilities

CAPEX – $400,000 required to bring hall up to standard; ongoing renewals also required

Additional staff resource may be required

Staff time/ project management

Potential consequential OPEX and renewals if proceeds of sale are used on a council building project

Current CV is $820,000

Minimal cost to council

Likely to be some staff time and legal fees to lift the caveat on the title

Service limitations/ opportunities

Additional meeting/activity space for older people but no evidence of need; other nearby bookable spaces available with capacity

Potentially require dedicated staff resource to ensure benefits older people

S140 and s141 Local Government Act restrict use and disposal of property held in trust – Senior Citizens Club would need to be consulted on sale

Potential for service/OPEX projects or roles to be funded

Potential to increase services to older people in Papakura without resources required from council

Risks

Condition continues to deteriorate as no budget available for renewals and depreciation

Insufficient demand for hall space from older people to justify dedicated building resulting in low utilisation

No suitable projects or services identified that benefit older people specifically

No internal capacity to manage specific grants round

Perception of opportunity missed by council

 

21.     Option 1, accepting the transfer of assets is the mostly costly option for the council, followed by option 2, accepting the transfer of assets and selling the hall.  Both options will require significant staff resource and reprioritisation of current work programme priorities to progress. 

22.     The club has prepared a list of charitable organisations to distribute proceeds of sale to if the council declines the transfer of assets, as per option 3.  These organisations are well placed to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas.

Recommendation to decline the transfer of assets

23.     We recommend option 3 to decline the transfer of assets for the reasons outlined below.

There is no need for additional hall/venue for hire space in Papakura 

24.     There are three council owned venue for hire facilities within one kilometre of the hall – Papakura Old Central School, Massey Park Grandstand Function Room and Elizabeth Campbell Hall.  There is also a meeting room at the Sir Edmund Hillary Library (available during opening hours) which is less than 300 metres from the hall. 

25.     All facilities have capacity for more bookings; several rooms have no bookings for entire days.

26.     The cost of hiring council venues has been raised as a barrier for use.  If the transfer of assets was accepted, we would recommend that the hall is brought in line with the hire costs of other council facilities.

27.     Given there is capacity available in other facilities in Papakura and these facilities are available for general use including older people, we do not consider there is a need for the Papakura Senior Citizens Hall.

The hall is in poor condition     

28.     An asset condition assessment has been completed by Community Facilities.  The hall is in poor condition with particular concern about weathertightness (windows), water ponding in internal guttering and an inadequate fire safety system.  Due to the age and condition of the hall, it will require ongoing funding to ensure it is safe to use.

There is no funding for renewals and ongoing operating expenses  

29.     The estimated cost to bring the hall up to standard is $400,000.  Ongoing renewals would also need to be funded.

30.     Operating expenditure of approximately $33,000 per annum (based on similar facilities) would be required for maintenance, cleaning and utilities.

31.     Depending on the way the hall is operated (e.g. council run or third party/lease), additional operating expenditure could be required to fund the management of the hall, to ensure the hall is used for the benefit of older people and to support activities and programmes specific to older people.

32.     There is no funding available to bring the hall up to standard, fund operating costs or ongoing renewals and maintenance.  We would need to reprioritise existing projects and renewals to accept the transfer of assets. 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33.     Declining the transfer of assets does not have a climate impact. Accepting the transfer of assets would mean the council is responsible for the climate impacts of the existing building.  There is limited opportunity to increase the sustainability of the building without significant investment.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

34.     Connected Communities and Community Facilities have been involved in the preparation of this advice and support the recommendations.  The impact on their areas varies with the options.  The greatest impact on staff and resources would be option 1, the transfer of assets is accepted.  Connected Communities would be responsible for managing the use of the hall or a specific grants process if the hall is sold by the council.  Community Facilities would be responsible for renewing and maintaining the hall. 

35.     Panuku Development Auckland have confirmed their willingness to explore Haumaru Housing projects in Papakura or surrounding areas that could be suitable for use of the proceeds of sale if option 2 is progressed.  

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

Local impacts and local board views

36.     Papakura Senior Citizens Club wound up in December 2020.  They would like a decision on the transfer of assets as soon as possible.  There are concerns about the security of the hall while it is not being actively managed and they cannot afford to continue paying for cleaning and utilities. 

37.     It is understood that the two groups who were using the hall have been given notice to vacate by the club.

38.     A workshop was held with Papakura Local Board on 10 March 2021.  The board expressed sadness at the closing of the hall, however, it was understood that the current financial situation and cost of bringing the hall up to standard is prohibitive. Concern for isolated older people in Papakura who are not catered for by rest homes was also raised.  There is an opportunity for this to be addressed by the charitable groups who receive the proceeds of sale from the club.

39.     The board raised the Papakura Returned and Services’ Association (RSA) as an organisation who may be interested in the hall.  Staff consider that the hall is not fit-for-purpose due to its size, condition, internal layout, lack of commercial kitchen, bar, carparking and accessibility.     

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

40.     There is no particular impact on Māori of declining the transfer of assets.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41.     There are minimal financial implications of the recommended option 3.  There will be some legal costs to lift the caveat on the title to allow the club to sell the hall and this will be funded from existing budgets.

42.     The financial implications of option 1, accepting the transfer of assets are $400,000 CAPEX in financial year 2022 (FY22), approximately $33,000 OPEX per annum from FY22 and ongoing renewals funding.  There is also likely to be a requirement for additional staff resource to manage the hall or fund a third party to manage the hall. 

43.     There is no funding available and projects and renewals would need to be stopped/ reprioritised to create capacity.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44.     The main risk of the recommended option 3 is the perception that the council has missed an opportunity to benefit older people in Papakura and surrounding areas.  However, the club has suggested a number of charitable organisations who could receive the proceeds of sale and benefit older people through their services.

45.     The risks associated with options 1 and 2 are listed in Table 1 in paragraph 20.  The main risks to the council of accepting the assets are financial and/or resource related.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

46.     Staff will complete further investigation on the parking requirements in relation to the Deed and Bond referred to in caveat 073463.1 on the title.

47.     A report will be prepared for the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee 13 May 2021 meeting.  The feedback from Papakura Local Board will be included in the report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Nicola Terry - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and Integration

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Libraries and Service Centre integration

File No.: CP2021/03873

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide information on the integration of the provision of services currently provided in the standalone customer service centre at 35 Coles Crescent, within the Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       We are aiming to leverage the strong community presence of the libraries network and deliver customer services within them to create integrated community hubs (where it makes sense).

3.       In the last three years our customer services centres have experienced an increase in the number of online transactions and a subsequent decline in the number of face-to-face transactions.

4.       The Papakura Service Centre experienced a reduction of 34% and 48% respectively in FY19/20 and FY20/21 when compared to the prior year.

5.       In libraries there has also been a move to self-service digital transactional activities resulting in a downward trend in site visits.

6.       In many areas the customer service centre is located adjacent to or near a local library.

7.       The integration of services currently provided in standalone customer service centres with libraries aims to:

·    create a seamless and connected customer experience

·    leverage the library presence in communities and realise the opportunity for libraries to be the face of council in local communities.

8.       A workshop was held with the Papakura Local Board on 22 February 2021 to provide an overview of the integration of service centre and libraries services, as it applies to the Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library.

9.       Panuku and Corporate Property have presented separately to the local board on 14 April 2021 in a workshop and are continuing to work with the local board regarding the future of the site and potential location of the local board office.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the Libraries and Service Centre integration report.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

10.     This initiative aims to leverage the strong community presence of the libraries network and deliver customer services within them to create integrated community hubs (where it makes sense); and move to more cost-effective channels such as digital and self-service.

11.     At the beginning of 2020, Auckland Council’s Customer and Community directorate initiated work on the council’s approved Channel Strategy (Customer Smart 2019) and how to right-size our customer service network given changes in customer behaviour and the diverse needs of communities across Tāmaki Makaurau.  

12.     In the last three years our customer services centres have experienced an increase in the number of online transactions and a subsequent decline in the number of face-to-face transactions.

13.     The Papakura Service Centre experienced a reduction of 34% and 48% respectively in FY19/20 and FY20/21 when compared to the prior year. This increases the average cost of each transaction to a level that is disproportionate to the service being delivered.

14.     In Libraries there has also been a move to self-service digital transactional activities resulting in a downward trend in site visits.

15.     In many areas the customer service centre is located adjacent to or near a library.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16.     The integration of services currently provided in standalone customer service centres with libraries aims to:

·    create a seamless and connected customer experience

·    leverage the library presence in communities and realise the opportunity for libraries to be the face of council in local communities.

17.     In Papakura this means:

·    Better utilising the Papakura-Sir Edmund Hillary Library, by having Library and Council Service Assistants to assist with all customer enquiries

·    Better utilising the Post Shop agency for payment transactions. In Papakura this is at the Unichem Papakura Pharmacy.

·    Offering Council Services transactions during all library hours which are longer than existing service centre hours

·    Better utilising Contact Centre services available 24/7

·    Proactively supporting customers to transition to online services wherever possible

·    Offering general services at libraries, including support and training for online services and free access to the internet.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

18.     We have reduced our footprint of a standalone customer service centre in Papakura.

 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19.     Staff from Customer Services, Connected Communities (formerly Libraries & Information) and Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships have been involved in this project. 

20.     Other council departments have provided specialist input including Corporate Property, Local Board Services and Regulatory Services.

21.     Panuku and Corporate Property presented separately to the local board on 14 April 2021 in a workshop and are continuing to work with the local board regarding the future of the site and potential location of the local board office.

22.     Regulatory Services will consult with the local board regarding the future provision of building consent front of house services currently offered from 35 Coles Crescent, Papakura.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23.     A comprehensive training programme for libraries staff based in integrated sites is being implemented to ensure they can support customers seeking assistance with service centre transactions.

24.     To ensure the community is aware of the changes, six to eight weeks prior to the change implementation, customers will be informed of the changes to service offerings and the alternatives available; including information on the council website, posters at impacted sites and public notices in local newspapers.

25.     A workshop was held with the local board on 22 February 2021 to provide an overview of the integration of Service Centre and Libraries services, as applies to Papakura.

26.     We are working closely with staff about the proposed changes.

27.     We are working together with Corporate Property; Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library and the Papakura Service Centre leads (Community Library Managers, Service Centre Team Leads) to inform the design of the library layout for providing an integrated service.

28.     A comprehensive audit of the library was carried out and included an assessment of the existing layout, existing signage, and review of security measures,

29.     Key considerations include ensuring there is good flow from the library entrance to service counters/pods for customers; an appropriate number of pods/service counters and other available spaces for staff to assist customers who may have more complex enquiries; and security of staff.

30.     The health, safety and wellbeing of our people is a high priority and all aspects of how our policy and practices as they apply to Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library have been considered. 

31.     Security measures to accommodate the new service centre functions including cash-handling facilities will be implemented, and these security measures continue to be audited and updated as required.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     Library services provide benefit to the community as a place of information, delivery of services and activities, and local community interaction and engagement. Māori, as part of the Papakura community will continue to benefit from the delivery of library and Council services from the Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

33.     There are no financial implications for the local board arising from the integration of services. The project has allocated expenditure for any physical layout changes to the front of house area with support from Corporate Property. The staff cost savings are attributed to Customer Services in line with the Emergency Budget 2020/2021.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34.     The following table outlines relevant risks and mitigations.

Risk

Impact

Mitigation

Customers are unclear how to access service centre services.

Customer needs and expectations for service centre services are not met.

Communication in advance to ensure customers are aware of options to access services and support from libraries.

Customers do not have access to online services.

Customer needs and expectations for service centre services are not met.

Customers will continue to have access to support and training for online services and free access to the internet across the Libraries network including Papakura, Sir Edmund Hillary Library.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

35.     Implementation is planned during June 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and Integration

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

Justine Haves - General Manager Service Strategy and Integration

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Proposal to vary the Regional Fuel Tax scheme

File No.: CP2021/03643

 

  

 

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 Papakura 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.     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

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Justine Yu - Senior Advisor - Fin Policy

Michael Burns - Manager Financial Strategy

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - General Manager, Financial Strategy and Planning

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Proposal to make a new Public Trading and Events Bylaw

File No.: CP2021/03235

 

  

 

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, deliberations for October and a final Governing Body decision for November 2021.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura 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:

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:


 

 

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:

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:

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

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Draft Statement of Expectations for Council-controlled Organisations

File No.: CP2021/03547

 

  

 

 

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 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 Ten 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 Papakura 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 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 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 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 well 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.  In particular, 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 Maori 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 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 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 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. 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 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

73

     


 

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Edward Siddle - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Statement of proposal to amend the Animal Management Bylaw and controls

File No.: CP2021/02950

 

  

 

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 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:

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.

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 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

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.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A - Statement of Proposal (Under Separate Cover)

 

b

Attachment B - Previous Local Board Views (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Attachment C - Regulatory Committee Decisions on Bylaw Improvements (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Breanna Hawthorne - Policy Analyst

Saralee Gore - Graduate Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Public feedback on proposal to make new navigation rules

File No.: CP2021/03418

 

  

 

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 Papakura 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. 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.

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 four people and one organisation from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal via online and email feedback. A significant majority supported proposals 3 to 7, while 75 per cent did not agree with Proposal 1 to increase the speed on the Waitematā Harbour Zone to 18 knots and split for proposals 2 and 8.

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).

25 per cent (1/4 people)

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

50 per cent (2/4 submitters)

70 per cent

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

75 per cent (3/4 submitters)

85 per cent

4a:     Make new rules for the Tamaki River Entrance

66 per cent (2/3 submitters)

69 per cent

4b:     Make new rules for the Commercial Port Area

75 per cent (3/4 submitters)

75 per cent

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

75 per cent (3/4 submitters)

71 per cent

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

100 per cent (4/4 submitters)

77 per cent

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

100 per cent (4/4 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

50 per cent (2/4 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 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 and 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 Papakura Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Operational and non-bylaw-related feedback (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Bayllee Vyle – Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Team Leader Bylaws

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Review of the Code of Conduct - draft revised code

File No.: CP2021/04071

 

  

 

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 Papakura 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 on 27 May 2021.

 

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:

i)          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.

ii)         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.

iii)         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:

i)        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.

ii)       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 - GM Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Auckland Council's Performance Report - Papakura Local Board for November 202 to February 2021

File No.: CP2021/04311

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Papakura 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:

·        Hawkins Theatre highlights included the annual Stewarts Dance Studios showcase, Doyles Academy of Irish Dance end of year performances, and the performance by the Manukau Youth Orchestra.

·        Papakura Art Gallery held the opening of the exhibition ‘Harakeke’ with taonga from weaver Te Atiwei Ririnui and local weaver Nana Kura Walker. Weaving workshops were delivered alongside the exhibition. Another exhibition held was ‘Birds from Another Continent’.

·        The board has been advised that $40,066 Locally Driven Initiatives Operating expenditure (LDI Opex) top up allocated to the Papakura Art Gallery at the start of 2020/2021 is no longer required and department staff have recommended the board reallocate this LDI Opex to another project. Of note, Community Facilities staff have identified the ‘Kirikiri Reserve concept plan development’ project as suitable to be brought forward if an estimated $40,000 budget could be reallocated during this financial year to this project. 

·        The Brass Band performed at the Papakura Santa Parade, provided carol services for the Papakura Salvation Army, bugler services for Papakura RSA and performances at Summerset Karaka and Lady Elizabeth retirement villages.

·        The Papakura Museum held the ‘Buller’s Birds: The Art of Keulemans and Buchanan’ and ‘Art of War’ exhibitions.

·        The Papakura Pipe Band participated in the Papakura Santa Parade, Papakura Armistice Day Parade and hosted the second annual Auckland Indoor Drum Solo Contest at the Papakura Off Broadway Theatre.

·        Papakura Community Network continues to grow in numbers and attendance and the February meeting had 45 attendees. Guest speaker Dr Haare Williams spoke to the group on Tiriti o Waitangi and the history of Māori settlement in Papakura over the last 100 years.

·        The Corner continues to manage the "Your Papakura" website and Facebook activity. Website visits have significantly increased, as has Facebook followers.

·        The Chillax event held at Smiths Ave attracted over 500 community members.

·        The Movies in Parks event featuring ‘Dumbo’ held in February had around 600 people attend.

·        Over 3,020 participants attended 78 park activations in this trimester.

·        The Papakura Marae Tohu six youth development grants have been distributed. Local board support for the trial project in 2019/2020 has aided Papakura Marae to leverage a supporting grant from Te Puni Kokiri (TPK) in 2020/2021. The additional grant funding from TPK will support additional youth placements and development opportunities for local youth.

·        Local board youth scholarships were awarded to 15 recipients with a ceremony in December.

·        Staff have worked with Ngāti Tamaoho, seed funding initiatives that progress local Māori aspirations including workshops to receive and know their history before it is shared with the wider community, and a pilot tourism opportunity, sharing stories of the area as kaitiakitanga.

·        Stage two of the waharoa conceptual plans at Pukekiwiriki Pā have been selected by the project committee.

4.       All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided an update against their work programme delivery in Attachment A. 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 (behind delivery, significant risk).

5.       The financial performance report compared to budget 2020/2021 is attached. There are some points for the local board to note. Net operating performance for Papakura local board area is eleven-point five percent below budget for the eight months ended February 2021. After adjustment for a lease payment refund, operating expenditure is eight percent below budget affected by continued disruption of facilities and services under COVID-19 alert level three in the Auckland region.  Operating revenue has increased slightly to twenty-eight per cent ahead of budget including commercial property revenue, some hall hire, and library service charges.  Capital expenditure is eleven percent ahead of budget mostly for the near completion of Takaanini multi-purpose facility ahead of budget timeline.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

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

b)      approve the reallocation of $40,066 Locally Driven Initiatives Operating expenditure (LDI Opex) from the ‘Operational expenditure for Papakura Art Gallery (council facility)’ work programme line 951 to a new work programme line ‘Kirikiri Reserve concept plan development’ within the Community Facilities 2020/2021 work programme.

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       The Papakura Local Board has an approved 2020/2021 work programme for the following operating departments:

·        Arts, Community and Events;

·        Parks, Sport and Recreation;

·        Libraries and Information;

·        Community Facilities: Build Maintain Renew;

·        Community Leases;

·        Infrastructure and Environmental Services;

·        Local Economic Development;

·        Plans and Places;

·        The Southern Initiative

·        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, and 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 1: 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 1: 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 2: Work programme by RAG status

 

10.     The graph below shows the work programme activity status by department. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes. 

Key activity updates

11.     The Hawkins Theatre delivered 35 programmes with 103 sessions and received a combined total of 9,156 attendees and participants. Highlights included the annual Stewarts Dance Studios showcase, Doyles Academy of Irish Dance end of year performances, and the performance by the Manukau Youth Orchestra.

12.     Papakura Art Gallery was reopened during the period from November 2020 to February 2021 and held the opening of the exhibition ‘Harakeke’ with tonga from weaver Te Atiwei Ririnui and local weaver Nana Kura Walker. Weaving workshops were delivered alongside the exhibition. Another exhibition held was ‘Birds from Another Continent’ by artist Rozana Lee.

13.     The board has been advised that $40,066 LDI Opex top up allocated to the Papakura Art Gallery at the start of 2020/2021 (‘Operational expenditure for Papakura Art Gallery (Council Facility)‘ work programme line 951), to assist with the funding of staffing and exhibitions, was no longer required and department staff have recommended the board reallocate this LDI opex to another project within the 2020/2021 year. Community Facilities staff have identified the ‘Kirikiri Reserve Concept Plan Development’ project, currently scheduled for a future year, as a high priority project that could be brought forward. The initial estimate for this concept plan project is $40,000 and staff recommend the board reallocate available underspend from 2020/2021 to this new work programme line.

14.     The Brass Band delivered 27 programmes to a combined total of 3,990 attendees and participants. Highlights included the bands performance at the Papakura Santa Parade in December, as well as providing carol services for Papakura Salvation Army, bugler services for Papakura RSA and performances at Summerset Karaka and Lady Elizabeth retirement villages.

15.     The Papakura Museum hosted the Summerset Retirement Village group who visited the ‘Buller’s Birds: The Art of Keulemans and Buchanan exhibition’. The ‘Art of War’ exhibition was also held.

16.     The Papakura Pipe Band delivered nine programmes, which included 14 programme sessions to 13,525 participants and attendees, four of which had Maori outcomes. Highlights included the band's participation in the Papakura Santa Parade, the Papakura Armistice Day Parade and the hosting of the second annual Auckland Indoor Drum Solo Contest at the Papakura Off Broadway Theatre.

17.     Papakura Community Network (PCN) continues to grow in numbers and attendance. The December meeting included guest youth speakers from Papakura High school. Members were encouraged to donate gift vouchers for students most in need of support. The February PCN meeting had 45 attendees. Guest speaker Dr Haare Williams spoke to the group on Tiriti o Waitangi and the history of Māori settlement in Papakura over the last 100 years. The Corner continue to manage the "Your Papakura" website and Facebook activity. Website visits increased from 500 in FY20 to 1140 (July – December 2020). Facebook increased from 250 followers FY20 to 630 followers (July-December). The total reach increased from 10,000 users – to 16,226 users (six months). Seventeen Neighbours Day activations are scheduled to occur during the national Neighbours Day campaign 20 March – 30 March 2021. Participation in Neighbours Day 2020 activity increased by 14% compared to 2019 and we are expecting a further increase in 2021. Kootuitui held a neighbourly activation supporting the Rollerson Garden makeover.

18.     Significant development milestones have been met for the Smiths Ave community. The Chillax event held at Smiths Ave in October attracted over 500 community members. The Smith Ave Mind Over Matter (SAMOM) Trust has become incorporated. Kuraconnect held a youth activation day in January. New programmes that began in February include guitar coaching, Te Reo and kapahaka coaching, choir, Hip Hop, weekly afternoon youth activation and sports coaching for youth. A weekend breakfast programme is underway with Sanitarium sponsoring products. Planning continues for the development of a community garden. The Smiths Ave Coordinator has voluntarily completed replacing the fence line palings along the driveway which has now been decorated with a mural.

19.     Papakura Youth Council (PYC) worked on updating its Terms of Reference which was presented to the Papakura Local Board for approval. At the end of 2020, many long-standing members of the youth council left (as a result of membership age restrictions), resulting in multiple positions being available. A new executive committee was formed with a new chairperson and new committee members. PYC held their strategic retreat in February 2021. This included welcoming new members, planning events for the year and familiarising themselves with key places in the community. A work programme for 2021 was completed.

20.     Local board youth scholarships were awarded to 15 recipients with a ceremony in December.

21.     A community garden makeover/ volunteer day was organised for December 2020 to revitalize the Rollerson Garden. Around 30 volunteers attended. The makeover was supported by Papakura Local Board, Manukau Beautification Trust, Park's maintenance staff, Kootuitui Trust and Smiths Ave/SAMOM Trust volunteers. Rollerson Garden community volunteers continue to meet at the gardens on Sundays.

22.     The Corner team have prepared a calendar of activations for 2021. The focus for 2020/2021 is on building the social enterprise and employment capability of the Trust in order to generate revenue and further support the employment prospects for young people utilising the Trust. The Trust and Trustees are now sufficiently well advanced to apply for grant funding from various sources to support employment opportunities for youth in the Papakura area. An example of recent success includes the Trust recently receiving an innovation grant from Foundation North to run an 8-week paid media internship. Eight interns have been engaged in late February. Continued development of the Trust governance and business structure will provide ongoing opportunities to apply for this type of grant funding to support local internships and specific media and arts related outputs.

23.     Staff provided an update in December to elected members on initiatives for older people being piloted. Elected members approved an amendment to the delivery of the 'Honouring older voices' arts initiative and this will now form the second phase of the existing Representing Papakura Arts Project. Additional funding was provided to the Spin Poi initiative which enhanced training workshops and increased the sustainability of this initiative in the community. The first Spin Poi “train the trainers” workshop took place in January with 10 trainers participating. Three community workshops will be held in the library and other central Papakura locations. Papakura Library are keen to deliver Spin Poi classes. This presents an opportunity to create a central and sustainable delivery channel for this accessible and wellbeing focused programme. Papakura Museum and Sustainable Papakura also intend to run Spin Poi activations for their members to help older persons to improve their balance and strength and improve connection to community.

24.     The Movies in Parks event featuring ‘Dumbo’ was held on 27 February 2021 at Central Park in Papakura. Approximately 600 people attended.

25.     In relation to Massey Park Stadium, COVID-19 has continued to throw up challenges but summer bookings have gone ahead when allowed under the government restrictions. The grounds have continued to be maintained as per contract and the field condition is still surprisingly good with fill grass cover even with the water restrictions faced over the last 12 months. Sanding and reseeding and fertilising of the field has been undertaken as part of the seasonal renovation programme and the field will be ready for winter play for the seasons first bookings. Casual use of the grounds has remained high even over the lock downs with people walking the track and unofficial use of the field. There has been some progress on the replacement of the score board and microphones at this site. Winter season on these grounds is due to start in full on the 27 March 2021 but preseason games and training has already started.

26.     Massey Park Pool had a slow start to this period as people were reluctant to come back following the lockdown in August. By December schools were happy to be back for water safety lessons and end of year events. The site hosted Papakura Swim Club Nights in October and November, and the Christmas Relays in December was a successful evening with quite a few Swim Magic students joining in. Sixteen schools (with a total of 1880 students) used the centre in December for the end of school year break up parties. One issue this quarter was being in Level 2 during one of the busiest times, the October school holidays. The staff could not deliver the full programmes due to the COVID-19 restrictions. Another challenge during this time was finding security, as the normal providers were busy with COVID-19 contracts and unable to start until December.

27.     Papakura Leisure Centre visits were 22 per cent lower compared to the same period last year, which is due to the COVID-19 lockdown and restrictions. However, the centre has maintained or shown steady growth this quarter in the Chill Out Before and After School Care programme bookings and attendance, Holiday Programme bookings and attendance, fitness centre membership and casual stadium usage. The Chill Out Holiday Programme numbers continue to exceed targets with over 200 children attending on a daily basis. Stadium usage continues to be high, with approximately six hours of available space over a seven-day week. Weekends continue to see regular hire outside of opening hours. The mixed netball league on Tuesday nights continues to be full with 12 teams enrolled each term. Due to a demand for another night of mixed netball, another mixed league will be added on a Thursday night, replacing women's netball which did not run due to low team enrolments. Participation in the Papakura Christmas Parade and providing the inflatable bouncy castle and slide for Chilling in the Park on 6 December was the highlight for this quarter. The facility entered a float and received second place in the business category.

28.     Over 3,020 participants attended 78 park activations in this trimester. Activations affected by COVID-19 level three lockdowns, will be rescheduled with delivery partners for March.

29.     The Papakura Swimming Club has booked swimming lessons at Massey Park for around 12 weeks. The local board funding has covered both lane hire and staff costs. The club previously charged $30 per child and $75 for a family of three or more children. With local board funding support, they have reduced fees to $5 per child and $10 per family.

Activities on hold

30.     The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

·        Papakura Town Centre – investigate digital signage

·        20R Victoria Street, Drury 2578: Drury United Football Club Incorporated (Community Lease)

Changes to the local board work programme

Cancelled activities

31.     These activities are cancelled:

·        ‘Broadway Papakura shared space’ contribution.  This work programme line was the board’s contribution towards a co-funded innovating streets project. The project was not selected to proceed in 2020 and without the external funding the board resolved to cancel this work programme line and to make this capex budget available for allocation in 2021/2022.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

32.     These activities have been merged with other activities for efficient delivery:

·        Carry-forward Manukau Harbour Forum-Papakura (line 2299) was merged with Manukau Harbour Forum – Papakura (line 1817).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

34.     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

35.     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

36.     This report informs the Papakura Local Board of the performance for November 2020 to February 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37.     At the February Papakura Community Network meeting guest speaker Dr Haare Williams spoke to the group on Tiriti o Waitangi and the history of Māori settlement in Papakura over the last 100 years.

38.     The Papakura Marae Tohu six youth development grants have been distributed. Local board support for the trial project in 2019/2020 has aided Papakura Marae to leverage a supporting grant from Te Puni Kokiri (TPK) in 2020/2021. The additional grant funding from TPK will support additional youth placements and development opportunities for local youth.

39.     Staff have worked with Ngāti Tamaoho, seed funding initiatives that progress local Māori aspirations including workshops to receive and know their history before it is shared with the wider community, and a pilot tourism opportunity, sharing stories of the area as kaitiakitanga. Staff are collaborating with Te Paataka Koorero o Takaanini / Takaanini Library and Community Hub management to connect with local stakeholders and community groups. Members will shortly be commencing the Aarahi Reo programme which will provide opportunities for members to build their knowledge and understanding of the local history and narratives of mana whenua of the rohe. This will enhance and support members respective roles and responsibilities and also provide te reo and tikanga assisting members to engage more meaningfully with Māori communities. This aligns with Council Māori Outcomes Strategic outcome – Te Reo. The council group supports te reo Māori to be seen, heard, spoken and learned throughout Tāmaki Makaurau. Staff continue to build relationships with Māori communities and work with them to progress opportunities to support aspirations in practical and effective ways.

40.     Libraries staff report the visits to Ngā Puawai and Maungakohungahunga Kōhanga Reo focused on the environment and water safety. Donovan Bixley artist/illustrator of bilingual Māori children's books gave an engaging presentation to an audience of children and whānau. Together they created original visual characters that may be used in his future books. A Māori myth Te Waka o Rata came to life through shadow puppetry, delivered in Te Reo Māori and English. This was a highlight of the summer school holiday programme. The month long commemoration of Te Tiriti o Waitangi showcased library collections. The Māori audio visual content was particularly popular with customers.

41.     The Southern Initiative has completed the funding agreement for Mā Te Huruhuru to support two rangatahi to get into demand led workforce development. The two rangatahi have been receiving support and are progressing well towards employment in traffic control roles. Alongside these two, another rangatahi showed interest in participating and has been supported in an enterprise programme which is expected to give her some skills to get into an administrative role at an office. This programme commenced in late February 2021, and will be completed by June 2021.

42.     Stage two of the waharoa conceptual plans at Pukekiwiriki Pā have been selected by the project committee. An onsite meeting with the carver helped determine the areas and measurements of the waharoa.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43.     This report is provided to enable the Papakura 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

44.      Operating expenditure of $7.66 million is $1.04 million below budget.  Asset Based Services Operating expenditure (ABS Opex) is $730,000 below budget with $353,000 being property rental refunds under COVID-19. Wages and materials have also seen considerable underspend. Locally Driven Initiatives Operating expenditure (LDI Opex) is $307,000 behind budget as reallocations of underspend and carry forward options for undelivered projects are considered, and grants rounds are still to be completed.

45.     Operating revenue is ahead of budget in commercial lease revenue, library service charges, and community facility venue hire.

46.     Capital expenditure is $265,000 ahead of budget with notably the near completion of Takanini Multi-Purpose Facility ahead of budget timeline.

47.     The financial report for the eight months ended 28 February 2021 for Papakura local board area is in Attachment B.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

48.     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.

49.     Capital expenditure is $265,000 ahead of budget with notably the near completion of Takanini Multi-Purpose Facility ahead of budget timeline.

50.     The financial report for the eight months ended 28 February 2021 for Papakura local board area is in Attachment B to this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board November 2020 - February 2021 work programmes

111

b

Papakura Local Board Financial Report year to date February 2021

143

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Victoria Hutt - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 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

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator



Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2021/04158

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for the Papakura Local Board to receive reports and resolutions that have been referred from the Governing Body committee meetings, Council Controlled Organisations, forums or other local boards for information.

2.       The following information was circulated to the local board:

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board

1

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

18

17 March 2021

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

2

Local board input into preparation of the draft 2021 Regional Parks Management Plan

11

23 March 2021

Franklin Local Board resolutions circulated to all other local boards for their information

3

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

16

16 March 2021

Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

4

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

15

24 March 2021

Waiheke Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      receive the following information from the Governing Body committee meetings, Council Controlled Organisations, forums or other local board meetings:

No.

Report Title

Item no.

Meeting Date

Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board

1

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

18

17 March 2021

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

2

Local board input into preparation of the draft 2021 Regional Parks Management Plan

11

23 March 2021

Franklin Local Board resolutions circulated to all other local boards for their information

3

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

16

16 March 2021

Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

4

2021 Local Government New Zealand Conference and Annual General Meeting

15

24 March 2021

Waiheke Local Board resolutions circulated to other local boards for their information

 

 

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authorise

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Achievements Register 2019-2022 Political Term

File No.: CP2021/03580

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an opportunity for members to record achievements of the Papakura Local Board for the 2019 – 2022 political term.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       An opportunity to note achievements of the Papakura Local Board for the 2019 – 2022 political term.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      request any new achievements be added to the Papakura Local Board Achievements Register for the 2019-2022 political term.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board Achievements Register for the 2019 - 2022 political term

153

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - March 2021

File No.: CP2021/03581

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present to the Papakura Local Board the three months Governance Forward Work Calendar.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Governance Forward Work Calendar is a schedule of items that will come before the local board at business meetings and workshops over the next three months. The Governance Forward Work Calendar for the Papakura Local Board is included in Attachment A of this report.

3.       The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

i)    ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities

ii)   clarifying what advice is required and when

iii)   clarifying the rationale for reports.

4.       The calendar will be updated every month, be included on the agenda for business meetings and distributed to relevant council staff. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the Governance Forward Work Calendar as at 15 April 2021.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

5.       The council’s Quality Advice Programme aims to improve the focus, analysis, presentation and timeliness of staff advice to elected representatives. An initiative under this is to develop forward work calendars for Governing Body committees and local boards. These provide elected members with better visibility of the types of governance tasks they are being asked to undertake and when they are scheduled.

6.       There are no new projects in the Governance Forward Work Calendar. The calendar brings together in one schedule reporting on all of the board’s projects and activities that have been previously approved in the local board plan, long-term plan, departmental work programmes and through other board decisions. It includes Governing Body policies and initiatives that call for a local board response.

7.       This initiative is intended to support the board’s governance role. It will also help staff to support local boards, as an additional tool to manage workloads and track activities across council departments, and it will allow greater transparency for the public.

8.       The calendar is arranged in three columns, “Topic”, “Purpose” and “Governance Role”:

i)    Topic describes the items and may indicate how they fit in with broader processes such as the annual plan.

ii)   Purpose indicates the aim of the item, such as formally approving plans or projects, hearing submissions or receiving progress updates

iii)   Governance role is a higher-level categorisation of the work local boards do. Examples of the seven governance categories are tabled below:

Governance role

Examples

Setting direction / priorities / budget

Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan

Local initiatives / specific decisions

Grants, road names, alcohol bans

Input into regional decision-making

Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans

Oversight and monitoring

Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects

Accountability to the public

Annual report

Engagement

Community hui, submissions processes

Keeping informed

Briefings, local board forums

 

9.       Local board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar. The calendar will be updated and reported back every month to business meetings. Updates will also be distributed to relevant council staff.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     This report is an information report providing the governance forward work programme for the next three months.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

11.     The council is required to provide Governance Forward Work Calendar to the Papakura Local Board for their consideration.

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

Local impacts and local board views

12.     All local boards are being presented with a Governance Forward Work Calendar for their consideration.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

13.     The projects and processes referred to in the Governance Forward Work Calendar will have a range of implications for Māori which will be considered when the work is reported.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

14.     There are no financial implications relating to this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

15.     This report is a point in time of the Governance Forward Work Calendar. It is a living document and updated month to month. It minimises the risk of the board being unaware of planned topics for their consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

16.     Staff will review the calendar each month in consultation with board members and will report an updated calendar to the board.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board Forward Governance Calendar as at 15 April 2021

169

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

Papakura Local Board Workshop Records

File No.: CP2021/03582

 

  

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the Papakura Local Board record for the workshops held on 10, 17, 24 and 31 March, and 7 April 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       In accordance with Standing Order 12.1.4, the local board shall receive a record of the general proceedings of each of its local board workshops held over the past month.

3.       Resolutions or decisions are not made at workshops as they are solely for the provision of information and discussion. This report attaches the workshop record for the period stated below.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a)      note the Papakura Local Board workshop records held on:

i)        10 March 2021

ii)       17 March 2021

iii)      24 March 2021

iv)      31 March 2021

v)      7 April 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record 10 March 2021

175

b

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record 17 March 2021

177

c

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record 24 March 2021

179

d

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record 31 March 2021

181

e

Papakura Local Board Workshop Record 7 April 2021

185

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Autho

Paula Brooke - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

 


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Papakura Local Board

28 April 2021

 

 

PDF Creator

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.