Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board - Thursday, 20 May 2021

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

Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 15 April 2021 and the extraordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 6 May 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 Puketāpapa 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 Deputations - Current toilet/changing room facilities at Fearon Park

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Nick Tuialii from Mt Roskill Rugby Club will present to the local board on current toilet/changing room facilities at Fearon Park.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Nick Tuialii will present to the local board on current toilet/changing room facilities at Fearon Park and to provide contextual information and plans for the club to grow in the future.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) thank Nick Tuialii from Mt Roskill Rugby Club for his attendance.

8.2 Deputations - No.3 Roskill Theatre

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To present to the local board on a community led art initiative for the Roskill Community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Johne Leach, JLP Ltd, Director will present to the local board on a community led art initiative for the Roskill Community for the end of the year. They have the workings of an idea that they would like to present and to gauge feedback from the local board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) thank Johne Leach, Director, JLP Ltd for his attendance.

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Classification of Keith Hay Park North and South

File No.: CP2021/04777

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

To classify, under Section 16 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977, the following:

1. Keith Hay Park North and Keith Hay Park South as recreation reserve (with the exception of Section 1 SO 518562) and;

2. Section 1 SO 518562 at Keith Hay Park South as local purpose (community buildings) reserve.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Keith Hay Park lies between the South-Western Motorway and Richardson Road in Mount Roskill. The park is subject to the Reserves Act 1977 (RA) and is divided into Keith Hay Park North and Keith Hay Park South.

4. Keith Hay Park North forms one land parcel described as Part Allotment 77, Section 13, Suburbs of Auckland comprising 15.0097 hectares, held in fee simple by the council as an unclassified recreation reserve. (shown on Image 1, Attachment A)

5. A recreation reserve classification is recommended for Keith Hay Park North as the most appropriate classification as it is the purpose for which the reserve was originally vested and reflects current use of the land as sports grounds and leisure activities.

6. Keith Hay Park South comprises eight separately defined land parcels comprising a total of 7.6222 hectares which all have underlying Crown ownership through the Department of Conservation held as unclassified recreation reserves and vested in the Auckland Council, in trust, for recreation purposes. (shown on Image 2, Attachment A)

7. Section 1 SO 518562 is occupied by Hillsborough Kindergarten and it is proposed to classify this parcel as a local purpose (community buildings) to reflect the primary use as a kindergarten. (shown on Image 3, Attachment A)

8. It is a statutory requirement under the RA that council classifies all reserves vested in it according to its primary purpose. Where a reserve is awaiting classification (is unclassified) council as administering body of the reserve is unable to grant rights over the land such as leases, licenses, and easements until it is classified.

9. Council staff recommend that the Puketāpapa Local Board resolves to classify the land at Keith Hay Park North and South as recreation reserve (with exception of Section 1 SO 518562) which is recommended to be classified as local purpose (community buildings) reserve under section 16(1) of the RA.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) resolve to classify Keith Hay Park North described as Part Allotment 77, Section 13, Suburbs of Auckland comprising 15.0097 hectares as recreation reserve under section 16(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

b) resolve to classify Keith Hay Park South described as Allotment 78 Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 4.2745 hectares, Allotment 85 Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 218m2, Section 2 SO 518562 comprising 3.0047 hectares, Lots 1, 2 and 3 DP 60415 comprising 1007 m2, Allotment 79, Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 1135m2 as recreation reserve pursuant to Section 16 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

c) resolve to classify Keith Hay Park South described as Section 1 SO 518562 comprising 1070 m2 as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve under section 16(1) of the Reserves Act 1977.

Horopaki

Context

10. Keith Hay Park North and South are held under the provisions of the RA and the land must be classified to meet Council’s statutory obligations

11. Local boards hold delegated authority under section 16(1) of the RA to approve classification of council owned reserves, subject to all statutory processes having been satisfied.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Keith Hay Park North

12. Keith Hay Park North forms one land parcel described as Part Allotment 77, Section 13, Suburbs of Auckland comprising 15.0097 hectares. Part Allotment 77 is held in fee simple by the council as an unclassified recreation reserve.

13. In 1955 Part Allotment 77 was acquired by the Mount Roskill Borough Council from the Crown by way of a deferred payment licence granted by the Crown for ten years pursuant to the Land Act 1948.

14. The land was free-holded by the Crown under Section 54 of the Land Act and a new title was issued in 1966 in the name of the Mount Roskill Borough Council to hold the land in fee simple as a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves and Domains Act 1953.

15. The Department of Conservation has noted that because of the unusual way the Council acquired this reserve, none of the criteria set out under section 16(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977 (the successor of the Reserves and Domains Act) in regard to classifying the reserve apply. In order to classify this land as a recreation reserve, the Council is required to issue a gazette notice under section 16(1) of the RA.

16. The northern portion of Part Allotment 77 is covered in playing fields and used for soccer by Three Kings United Football Club. The southern portion is occupied by the Tristar Gym, Cameron Pool and Leisure Centre, the Auckland United Football Clubrooms and a carpark.

17. Part Allotment 77 was originally acquired for recreation reserve purposes and has been occupied by recreational activities since. A recreation reserve classification has been recommended for Part Allotment 77 as the most appropriate classification.

Keith Hay Park South

18. Keith Hay Park South comprises eight separately defined land parcels comprising a total of 7.6222 hectares described, as follows;

· Allotment 78 Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 4.2745 hectares

· Allotment 85 Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 218m2

· Section 2 SO 518562 comprising 3.0047 hectares

· Lots 1, 2 and 3 DP 60415 comprising 1007 m2

· Allotment 79, Section 13 Suburbs of Auckland comprising 1135 m2, and

· Section 1 SO 518562 comprising 1070 m2.

19. All eight land parcels have underlying Crown ownership through the Department of Conservation held as unclassified recreation reserves and vested in the Auckland Council, in trust, for recreation purposes.

20. It is proposed to classify Section 1 SO 518562 as a local purpose (community buildings) reserve which is has been used as a kindergarten since 1973.

21. Allotment 79 adjoins Richardson Road and is mainly occupied by a carpark used by parents and caregivers to drop off and collect their children attending the Hillsborough Kindergarten.

22. With the exception of Section 1 SO 518562 and Allotment 79, the other six parcels have a history of recreational occupation and it is proposed to classify those six parcels and Allotment 79 as recreation reserve.

Reserves Act 1977

23. The RA requires that all reserves must be classified for their primary purpose.

24. The purpose of recreation Reserves as set out in Section 17 of the RA is to provide “areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public, and for the protection of the natural environment and beauty of the countryside, with emphasis on the retention of open spaces and outdoor recreational facilities…”

25. The recreation classification is the most appropriate for the land (with the exception of Section 1, SO 518562) and is purpose intended for the reserve when it was originally acquired.

26. The council is not required to publicly advertise the intention to classify Keith Hay Park as recreation reserve because the reserve is already held as an unclassified recreation reserve.

27. Section16 (5) RA contains an exception to the requirement for public notification where the classification proposed for any reserve is substantially the same as the purpose for which the reserve was held and administered immediately before the commencement of the RA.

28. Section 1 SO 518562 is currently is held as unclassified recreation reserve although it has been administered and operated as a kindergarten since 1973. Public notification of the classification of Section 1 SO 518562 as local purpose (kindergarten) is not required as staff consider that the exception in section 16(5) RA applies.

29. Engagement with iwi is required for the proposed classification in terms of Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30. Classification of the reserve is an administrative matter and statutory requirement under the RA and accordingly there will be no climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. The proposed classification has no identified impact on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of advice in this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. The Puketāpapa Local Board holds the delegated authority under Section 16 (1) of the Reserves Act 1977 to resolve to classify Keith Hay Park North and South.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti O Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Maori.

34. There is no express requirement to consult Mana Whenua under the RA. However, section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 states:

Act to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi

This Act shall be so interpreted and administered as to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

35. On 25 March 2020 council staff presented the proposal to classify Keith Hay Park North and South at the Parks and Recreation South/Central Mana Whenua Engagement Forum.

36. No objections to the proposed classification of Keith Hay Park North and South were raised at the Forum.

37. Council staff subsequently emailed all iwi having an interest in the land on 9 December 2020 and no objections to the proposal were received.

38. There is general agreement among Mana Whenua representative to the council’s assessment, rationale, and proposals for classification of reserves.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. There are no financial operational implications for the local board in the classification process.

40. Publication in the New Zealand Gazette records the local boards resolution. A permanent public record of the classification will be obtained after registration of the published gazette notice. The cost of publication is approximately $120 and will be met by Community Facilities.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41. It is a statutory requirement that the Council classifies reserves vested in it as administering body.

42. Should the Puketāpapa Local Board resolve not to classify Keith Hay Park North and South, this decision would contravene the statutory requirements of the RA.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. Subject to the local board approval, council staff will complete the statutory processes to publish a notice in the New Zealand Gazette to record the classifications.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - Aeral view Keith Hay Park	15

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Katerina Marinkovich - Specialist Technical Statutory Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Community Facilities

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two and Multi-Board Round Two 2020/2021, grant allocations

File No.: CP2021/05677

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

To fund, part-fund or decline the applications received for Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two and Multi-Board Round Two 2020/2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

1. This report presents applications received for the Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two (Attachment B) and Multi-Board Round Two 2020/2021(Attachment C).

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 21 May 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

3. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $35,798.19 was allocated in previous grant rounds, this leaves a total of $102,744.81 to be allocated to one local grants and one quick response round including one multiboard round.

4. Nineteen applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round Two 2020/2021, requesting a total of $79,927.08 and fourteen multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $45,412.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 listed in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
LG2115-205	Kahui Tu Kaha Ltd	Arts and culture	Towards the cost of running the "International Women's Arts and Oranga Group" sessions in the local board area from 2 June 2021 to 30 June 2022, including the cost to facilitate participation in the community events and cultural festivals, venue hire, shared food, arts and crafts resources, specialist tutor fees, and gift vouchers for guest presenters.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-214	New Zealand Nepal Society Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the venue hire, educational resources, instructors’ honorarium and refreshment costs to run the Nepali language and culture classes in the local board area.	$4,500.00	Eligible
LG2115-218	Arogya Mantra	Arts and culture	Towards the "Garba Night" a pop-up dancing performance to showcase Indian dance by professional dancers on 17 September 2021, including the performance and workshop fees, lighting and decoration, a disc jockey, marketing, volunteer reimbursement, and administration cost for planning and execution.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-225	Action Education Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the facilitator fees, travel, administration, equipment, and resources to deliver 20 spoken word poetry workshops at the Mt Roskill Grammar School.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-201	Active Transport Trust	Community	Towards the purchase of 110 helmets including delivery charges, "Bike Kitchen" stickers, and artwork to be distributed with refurbished bicycles to the recipients of "Roskill Bike Kitchen" bicycles.	$1,162.00	Eligible
LG2115-204	Presbyterian Support (Northern)	Community	Towards the annual office rental cost at Family Works Mt Roskill.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-208	Life Education Trust Counties Manukau	Community	Towards the overall costs to deliver a health and well-being programme to schools in the Puketāpapa Local Board area including the costs of educational resources, insurances and teachers' salaries.	$4,994.88	Eligible
LG2115-209	Carlson Toy Library Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the purchase of active play toys for the toy library.	$3,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-211	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the venue hire cost for running an elderly support programme in the local board area.	$4,556.64	Eligible
LG2115-213	Auckland Regional Migrant Services Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the cost of rent, safari leaders and English language tutors’ fees, volunteer travel reimbursement and transport costs including the cost of the driver and mileage.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-219	Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the costs of training, management and supervision of the volunteer counsellors and telecommunications from 1 June 2021 to 31 March 2022.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-220	The Word Ministry Church	Community	Towards the cost of running a senior support programme, including the venue hire, facilitator, instructor, advertising and stationery costs.	$3,800.00	Eligible
LG2115-221	Citizens Advice Bureau Auckland City Incorporated	Community	Towards the purchase of four corflute signs for four community noticeboard campaigns across the Puketāpapa area.	$1,100.00	Eligible
LG2115-222	Action Aid Charitable Trust	Community	Towards venue cost including rent of the premises to run free computer classes for seniors aged 65 and over, from South Asian and Burmese migrant and refugee communities.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-224	New Zealand Centre for Gifted Education Limited	Community	Towards the specialist educators' salary to allow subsidies for the “MindPlus” programme.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-226	YMCA North Incorporated	Community	Towards the "Raise Up" Puketāpapa programme and event costs between June to December 2021 including meeting, uniform, facilitators, training, marketing, materials, transport, mileage, gifts, and prize costs.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-202	Pet Whisperer Rescue Trust	Environment	Towards medication, surgery, equipment and treatment care for stray and abandoned cats	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-210	Terry Conner Roskill Together Trust	Events	Towards the costs of the stage, sound system, and bouncy castle hire, the printing of corflute signs, permit fee, and face painters for a free one-day Spring/Christmas event at the Lynfield Reserve.	$5,000.00	Eligible
LG2115-207	Auckland Paraplegic and Physically Disabled Association Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of running 2021 junior and adult events, including the costs of advertising, programme coordinator's wages, sports development manager's and marketing manger's salaries.	$1,813.56	Eligible
Total				$79,927.08

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

b) agree to fund, part-fund or decline each application in Puketāpapa Multiboard Round Two 2020/2021, listed in Table Two below:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested	Eligibility
MB2021-209	New Zealand Dance Advancement Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the artistic costs and fees for the development of “2021 Tāmaki Tou”r and associated workshops.	$1,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-218	Leyte-Samar NZ Solidarity Foundation Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards the delivery of 2021 Quincentennial Celebration on 16 October, including event management, performance, choreographer fee, photography, food, decoration, costumes, and theatrical property costs.	$2,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-245	The Operating Theatre Trust	Arts and culture	Towards free theatre tickets for low decile school and early childhood centre from 25 September 2021 to 31 November 2021	$5,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-262	The Kids for Kids Charitable Trust	Arts and culture	Towards the venue hire and production costs to host the National Young Leaders Day event in May 2021.	$1,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-228	Re-Creators Charitable Trust	Community	Towards the costs for the upcycling workshops and to provide educational services in the local board area.	$4,766.00	Eligible
MB2021-243	Anxiety New Zealand Trust	Community	Towards the salary of the helpline manager, programme coordinator, a registered psychologist and community educator, and two intern psychologists to deliver a series of community workshops from July 2021 to May 2022.	$3,375.00	Eligible
MB2021-247	Roopa Aur Aap Charitable Trust	Community	Towards professional counselling services	$4,400.00	Eligible
MB2021-250	Social Enterprise Auckland	Community	Towards the delivery of the capability building workshops, which includes payments to host workshops as online events, venue, food, gifts for the physical event, contractor costs, project management, logistics and security.	$2,871.00	Eligible
MB2021-253	KidsCan Charitable Trust	Community	Towards programme items including food, raincoats, shoes and socks for children attending KidsCan low decile partner schools within the Auckland region	$5,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-260	PHAB Association (Auckland) Incorporated	Community	Towards operational costs, including youth worker wages, activity costs, administration and coordination fees from July 2021 to June 2022	$2,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-267	OUTLine New Zealand Incorporated	Community	Towards a portion of general operating expenses including telephone and internet costs, printing, insurance, clinical supervision wages, training fees and volunteer costs.	$1,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-217	New Zealand Eid Day Trust Board	Events	Towards costs of venue hire, security, audio-visual equipment, electrical services, cleaning, games, and entertainment to host the New Zealand Eid Day 2021 - Eid-ul-Adha.	$5,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-214	Auckland Softball Association Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards operating expenses for the Auckland Softball Association	$3,000.00	Eligible
MB2021-256	Waiata Epsom Tennis Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of stadium light replacement.	$5,000.00	Eligible
Total				$45,412.00

Horopaki

Context

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

2. Auckland Council’s Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme.

3. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· exclusions

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

· any additional accountability requirements.

4. The Puketāpapa Local Board adopted the Puketāpapa Local Board Community Grants Programme 2020/2021 on 21 May 2020 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for community contestable grants.

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

6. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $35,798.19 was allocated in previous grant rounds, this leaves a total of $102,744.81 to be allocated to one local grants and one quick response round including one multiboard round.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

· local food production and food waste reduction

· decreasing use of single-occupancy transport options

· home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation

· local tree planting and streamside revegetation

· education about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

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

10. A summary of each application received through Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round Two 2020/2021 and multi-board applications is provided in Attachment B and Attachment C.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

12. Ten applicants applying to Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two and seven applicants applying to the multiboard round two 2020/2021 indicate projects that target Māori or Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

14. The local board has set a total community grants budget of $138,543 for the 2020/2021 financial year. A total of $35,798.19 was allocated in previous grant rounds, this leaves a total of $102,744.81 to be allocated to one local grants and one quick response round including one multiboard round.

15. Nineteen applications were received for Puketāpapa Local Grants, Round Two 2020/2021, requesting a total of $79,927.08 and fourteen multiboard applications were also received requesting a total of $45,412.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

18. Following the Puketāpapa Local Board allocating funding for round two of the local grants and multiboard grants, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Grants Programme 2020/2021	29
b ⇨	Puketāpapa Local Grants Round Two 2020/2021 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Puketāpapa Multi-Board Round Two 2020/2021 - grant applications (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Moumita Dutta - Senior Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Marion Davies - Grants and Incentives Manager

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Urban Ngahere 10 Year Action Plan

File No.: CP2021/05743

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10-Year Action Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The regional Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau (Auckland’s Urban Forest Strategy) responds to changes in ngahere canopy cover and potential climate change impacts. The strategy’s target is to increase tree canopy cover across all local board areas in Tāmaki Makaurau to 30 per cent by 2050.

3. In 2018/2019 the Puketāpapa Local Board funded an implementation plan to understand the current canopy cover and plan for increasing ngahere cover in the local area. The three stages of the implementation plan are ‘knowing’, ‘growing’ and ‘protecting’.

4. The first part of the ‘knowing’ stage involved analysis of the 2013 Light Detecting and Ranging Technology (LiDAR) data for Puketāpapa canopy cover. A report identifying current cover of 20 per cent was adopted by the local board in 2019.

5. Further work is being done to analyse more recent data. Initial findings are that net canopy coverage decreased by point 3 per cent (0.3) between 2013 and (2016) 2018.

6. The final part of the ‘knowing’ stage has been to develop a 10-year action plan that identifies target areas where trees can be planted to help increase canopy cover in the local board area.

7. This report is seeking adoption of the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10-Year Action Plan (Attachment A).

8. The local board’s adoption of the action plan will set the direction for tree planting over the next 10 years and enable planning and preparation for the ‘growing’ phase to commence in July 2021.

9. It is recommended the action plan is reviewed every three years to align with local board plan development. This will update the board on planting progress, enable planning for maintaining existing plantings and highlight next steps to further increase canopy cover

10. Each year an annual planting plan, including site specific analysis, tree selection, soil and environmental condition analysis, will be prepared. The annual planting plan will require local board funding

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) adopt the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10 Year Action Plan

b) request that Parks, Sport and Recreation staff review the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10-Year Action Plan every three years and provide a report updating the local board on progress of delivery of the action plan.

c) request that Parks, Sport and Recreation staff review the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere Action Plan implementation work programme annually and provide a report to the local board on the delivery of new tree plantings.

Horopaki

Context

11. In 2016 staff studied the extent of urban forest canopy coverage across Tāmaki Makaurau using information captured from an aerial flight using LiDAR survey technology.

12. A detailed tree canopy analysis report was developed by staff from the Research Investigation Monitoring Unit (RIMU) and a regional strategy was developed, which the Governing Body approved in October 2018.

13. The regional strategy’s objective is to increase regional tree canopy cover to 30 per cent, with no local board area having less than 15 per cent canopy cover by 2050.

14. Local boards’ role in reaching this target is to develop local implementation plans to address the canopy loss in their local board area. The local implementation plan has three stages: ‘knowing’, ‘growing’ and ‘protecting’.

15. The ‘knowing’ stage of this planning included analysis of the canopy cover that currently exists across the local board area, and a comparison of net change over a three to five-year period. The percentage canopy cover analysis measures all vegetation on public and private land that is over three metres in height.

16. The Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report was approved by the local board on 19 September 2019 (PKTPP/2019/193). It found that the average tree canopy cover across the local board area was 20 per cent based on the findings of the 2013 LiDAR work.

17. The findings from the analysis report have been used to help inform development of the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10-Year Action Plan, providing guidance on how to redress the canopy loss.

18. The action plan will provide long-term direction on planting new trees across the local board area with a goal to increase overall tree canopy coverage.

19. Adoption and implementation of the action plan will lead to:

· planting of new specimen trees

· undertaking enrichment planting in local parks

· working with Auckland Transport to increase tree cover in the road corridor

· providing guidance and direction for community groups and council departments undertaking or organising community planting events.

20. Long term canopy coverage targets and areas to focus planting efforts are outlined in the action plan. Planting trees in these areas will increase canopy cover, establish, or enhance ecological corridors for wildlife and provide shade for key areas in parks and reserves.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. The action plan has been informed by findings from the canopy analysis report 2019. Findings in the analysis report were based on a LiDAR survey that was completed in 2013.

22. A follow up region wide LiDAR survey was carried out in 2016 and completed in (2016) 2018. The findings suggest a net decrease in canopy cover of 0.3 per cent in the local board area between 2013 and 2018 This equates to a negative decrease in overall coverage amounting to approximately 5.9 square hectares less tree canopy cover when compared to findings from 2013.

23. The comparative analysis shows decreases in canopy coverages took place mainly on privately owned land. One notable area of improvement was the net increase in tree canopy on public land within the road corridor, with results showing there was a net increase of 15 per cent.

24. The comparative findings are negative, with data analysis revealing losses are generally larger trees and the net overall tree canopy coverage on privately owned land has decreased. Analysis of the 2018 data has now been completed and an update on the findings will be reported to the local board in June 2021.

25. Site assessments have been carried out to investigate suitable locations for planting new specimen trees based on the information in the analysis report. The primary areas of assessment were parks with playgrounds and local streets that could provide green corridor connections between local parks.

26. These investigations, along with extensive site visits and subject matter expert input, have helped to inform the proposed locations and set the target for planting that is outlined in the action plan.

27. The target for the local board is to maintain existing and to increase tree canopy cover so that no suburb has a canopy coverage less than 15 per cent in the road corridor and on public reserve land over a 10-year period. This will require the planting of at least one hundred large growing specimen trees annually. Implementing a commitment to plant new trees annually will increase overall tree canopy coverages on publicly managed land by 2030.

28. The adoption of the action plan and its implementation will (over a 30-year period), lead to incremental changes that will help work towards achieving above the regional target of 30 per cent canopy cover.

29. Reporting on implementation of the plan every three years aligns with local board plan development. This will enable the local board to review the target and planting strategy, plan for the next areas of planting and consider the allocation of budgets required.

30. Staff have recommended a realistic target for the local board to work towards in the action plan. It is forecast that with small increases in new planting and decreases in tree removal year on year; the current 20 per cent cover is at least maintained with potentially an incremental increase in those areas less than 15 per cent as the new plantings mature over the next 30 years

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. Implementation of the strategy and the action plan is an example of an integrated approach to help mitigate emissions, build resilience longer term and enable adaptation to the impacts of climate change to meet Auckland Council’s climate goals.

32. The strategy is identified as a key action in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan 2020.

33. Increasing stock of trees and vegetation in Tāmaki Makaurau will increase carbon sequestration and contribute towards reducing net greenhouse gas emissions.

34. Increasing trees and vegetation also provides various natural functions that assist with adaptation to the climate change impacts for humans and other species, such as:

· providing a shading and cooling effect to counter rising temperatures

· slowing and reducing stormwater runoff to assist in managing increased rainfall events

· improve air quality by trapping particulates and filtering vehicle pollutants

· providing additional habitat for indigenous species to occupy, enhancing their resilience to climate change impacts.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. Collaboration across Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR), Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I&ES) and Community Facilities (CF) has been key to the development of the action plan.

36. CF has helped inform where the current maintenance and renewal programme for trees can be strengthened to improve the overall diversity and increase the extent of the tree canopy cover.

37. PSR will work with CF in developing the renewals programme to ensure an ongoing programme of tree renewal occurs to replace poor and ailing stock and to replant where dead, dying, or diseased trees are removed.

38. Staff will continue to collaborate and develop an annual planting programme and implementation plan for the delivery of new tree plantings in the 2021 planting season and beyond.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39. The draft action plan was workshopped with the local board on 14 October 2020. At the workshop board members were presented the draft plan and were asked to provide feedback. Feedback received at the workshop has been analysed by staff and incorporated into the final draft of the action plan.

40. The final version of the action plan was reviewed with the local board at a workshop on 1 April 2021. The feedback received has been incorporated into the final version in attachment A to this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41. The strategy was workshopped with mana whenua during its development in three workshops during 2017 and 2018. Feedback and views discussed at the hui helped to shape the final version of the strategy.

42. The use of native trees for all new tree planting is a strong view of mana whenua, and as such natives are the first choice for planting as outlined in the strategy. Native trees are also identified as the preference for planting in the action plan.

43. New tree plantings will benefit local Māori and the wider community by providing increased opportunities for access to nature and providing shade in the local park network.

44. Mana whenua will be updated in the coming months on the local implementation programme and will be engaged to support tree planting advice and to provide a cultural narrative in the choice of species for local areas.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. The adoption of the action plan will conclude the ‘knowing’ stage of the local board’s implementation of the strategy, which is funded by the Locally Driven Initiative (LDI) OPEX budget.

46. Delivery of the ‘growing’ stage will be funded by CAPEX from various budgets. These include LDI, Asset Based Services (ABS), the Natural Environment Targeted Rate (NETR) and Mayor’s Million Trees budgets that are allocated by the Governing Body.

47. In 2021/2022 the local board has proposed to allocate $25,000 LDI CAPEX to Community Facilities for the delivery of the strategy. The adoption of the action plan will direct priorities for this funding and ensure the right trees are planted in the right place in the 2021-2022 planting season.

48. To ensure the target outlined in the action plan is met, it is recommended that LDI CAPEX is allocated annually to the local board’s CF annual work programme to continue planting new trees. The amount of funding required will be quantified annually based on priorities to advance new tree plantings.

49. LDI OPEX will be sought each year for development of site-specific plans, for board approval to enable delivery of the local board’s annual tree planting programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

50. The trajectory of loss of tree canopy cover across the board area is expected to continue on private land as the area develops. New tree planting on public land is necessary to help offset these changes over the longer term.

51. Sufficient time is required to plan and prepare for planting. Should the local board not adopt the plan there is a risk that the ‘growing’ stage of the strategy will not be able to start in July 2021.

52. The 10 year action plan outlines a detailed ‘Planting Opportunities List’ to ensure the right tree is planted in the right place. Should the local board not adopt the action plan there is a risk that trees planted in 2021 will not be appropriate for their location.

53. There is a risk of poor maintenance of plants once they are in the ground. Adoption of the action plan will help mitigate this risk and enable staff to employ best practice tree planting and ongoing maintenance methods.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

54. Following adoption of the action plan, annual planting plans will be completed that identify areas for planting in 2021, 2022, 2023. These assessments will advise CF, Auckland Transport and other delivery partners on priorities for the ‘growing’ stage.

55. Annual updates on the ‘growing’ stage will be reported to the local board. These reports will be provided by departments that are leading the tree planting and collated by Parks Sports and Recreation staff to enable high level reporting on total numbers of new trees planted.

56. In 2023, staff will review progress of the Action Plan, report to the board on successes and challenges and recommend direction for planting and funding allocation for the following three years.

57. Comparative analysis of the 2013 and 2018 data sets have been finalised and work is in progress to update the Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2019. Staff will seek adoption of the updated analysis report by the local board in June 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Urban Ngahere 10 Year Action Plan	39

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Howell Davies - Senior Advisor - Urban Forest

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Licence to occupy to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust, Molley Green Reserve, 47-53 Morrie Laing Avenue, Mount Roskill

File No.: CP2021/05772

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a licence to occupy to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust, located on part of Molley Green Reserve, 47-53 Morrie Laing Avenue, Mount Roskill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 6 November 2020, landowner approval was given to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust to establish a food forest at Molley Green Reserve.

3. The land is described as Lot 42 DP 104188 and is currently held in fee simple by the Auckland Council and subject to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002.

4. Under section 138 of the Local Government Act a local authority granting a licence for more than six months must consult on the proposal. Prior to any licence being granted, engagement with mana whenua is also required under section 81 of the Act.

5. Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust will support the creation of the food forest and have a governance and accountability roll. The Molley Green Food Forest Group will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the food forest.

6. This report recommends Puketāpapa Local Board approve a licence to occupy to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust for a term of five years with one five year right of renewal commencing 20 May 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) approve a licence to occupy to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust for 850m2 (more or less) on part of Molley Green Reserve, described as Lot 42 DP 104188 on the following terms and conditions:-

i) term: five years commencing 20 May 2021 with one five year right of renewal

ii) rent: $1.00 plus GST per annum if requested

iii) the Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust community outcomes plan as approved and attached as a schedule to the licence to occupy document (Attachment B)

iv) all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 and the Local Government Act 2002.

Horopaki

Context

7. This report considers the recommendation to approve a licence to occupy to the trust located at 47-53 Morrie Laing Avenue, Mount Roskill.

8. The Puketāpapa Local Board is the allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including licence and lease matters.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The Land

9. The land is described as Lot 42 DP 104188 and is currently held in fee simple by the Auckland Council and subject to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002. The activity is permitted under the legislation subject to a licence to occupy for long term occupation of the land.

10. Under section 138 of the Local Government Act a local authority granting a licence for more than six months must consult on the proposal. Prior to any licence being granted, engagement with mana whenua is also required under section 81 of the Act.

Purpose of the food forest

11. The purpose and vision of the food forest is to supply food to the neighbourhood and create a space in an urban setting for gardening. The community is likely to undergo large scale housing intensification in the next five years. With intensification, properties will lose lawn and garden space. Being a neighbourhood that is on the lowest deprivation index, food shortage is an issue.

12. The food forest will consist of fruit trees, vegetable and herb beds, a composting area, handwashing space, irrigation and drainage swales, a water main extension and a tool cupboard. It will provide an opportunity for the community to connect to the whenua and learn the knowledge and skills of their ancestors.

13. Start-up costs will be approximately $2500 with on-going costs for irrigation when necessary. This will be part funded by Eco-Neighbourhoods group. Bunnings Warehouse and Keith Hay Homes have expressed interest in supporting the project and other local businesses will be approached for their support.

14. A comprehensive management plan has been created and reviewed by staff to ensure the garden is maintained and managed to a high standard. The plan includes an exit strategy should council require disestablishment of the garden.

15. The food forest is inclusive, will be open to the public with no fees, and will meet the needs of its community. It will not be locked or fenced off and will remain open to the public at all times.

16. Excess produce will be distributed through schools and through the Oasis Hub or to families in need through Community Approach. If food is damaged it will be processed through the participating school’s worm farms or the onsite compost system.

Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust

17. The trust was incorporated under the Charitable Trusts Act 1957 in January 2018 and is committed in attaining its purpose to:

· providing education about the role of kaitiaki via maara kai

· maintaining the role of kaitiaki for the whenua

· the maintenance of the tikanga around kaitiakitanga

· provide knowledge, mentorship and connection for community via maara kai

18. The trust is committed to nourishing communities and nurturing connections through kaitiakitanga. The trust works to empower people and communities to increase the availability and cultivation of kai. This is based on Hua Parakore principles and Mātauranga Māori to encourage self-reliance and self-sustaining practices that contribute to indigenous food security and food sovereignty in Aotearoa.

19. The trust specialises in mahinga kai, community engagement, environmental conservation and preservation. The Trust work collectively with whanau, hapu, marae, iwi, schools, community groups, and agencies to achieve its vision and mission.

20. The trust does not receive any government funding and relies on generous donations, grants and funding support, fundraisers, and volunteers. Any profits made through the active workstreams go directly into the active and aspiring Mauri Projects which are targeted at vulnerable communities and the restoration of natural resources.

21. The trust will actively seek to promote Te Reo Māori through signage and provide planting of native plants commonly used in Rongoa at the food forest.

Molley Green Food Forest Group

22. The Molley Green Food Forest Group will be responsible for the garden area and ongoing maintenance. The trust will support the Molley Green Food Forest Group to grow and flourish in the community. The trust brings a wealth of knowledge and opportunities for the forest group who are excited to work in partnership with a Kaupapa Māori organisation.

23. The forest group is part of the Waikōwhai Community Trust, also known as Roskill South Oasis Hub. It consists of representatives from Waikōwhai Primary School, Hay Park School, Waikōwhai Intermediate, Scouts, Community Approach, Eco-neighbourhoods Project, Kainga Ora and residents.

24. The forest group have partnered with schools who would be using the gardens as part of their garden to table project and have small classes attending the gardens two to three times per week. The group has also partnered with Community Approach who work out alternative action plans for youth in community service.

Public notification

25. Community consultation was undertaken in November 2019 with Waikōwhai Primary School, Mount Roskill Oasis Hub, Waikōwhai Intermediate School, Community Approach and Hay Park Primary School. Further community consultation was undertaken as part of Molley Green Day which was held on 21 March 2021 between 10.00am and 2.00pm. The event was an open public event with an attendance of over 150 people from the community. The community were in support of the food forest proposal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26. The reserve is a flood plain and flood prone area. Flood plains are predicted to be covered by flood water as a result of a 1-in-100-year rainstorm event by river or surface flooding. Flood prone areas are low points in the ground that may flood. The Trust would re-plant or elevate the proposed food forest to mitigate any issues caused by potential flooding.

27. The project will help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions with further planting. There are no increased greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the project.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. In compiling the recommendations contained herein staff have obtained input from colleagues in Connected Communities, Area Operations and Parks Sports and Recreation. No concerns were raised regarding the proposal.

29. The licence to occupy has no identified impact on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

30. The recommendations in this report were workshopped with the Puketāpapa local board on 28 January 2021.

31. The recommendation for a licence to occupy supports the 2020 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan:

· Outcome 1: Inclusive communities that are healthy, connected and thriving

· Outcome 3: Our environment is protected and enhanced for present and future generations

· Outcome 4: Well-planned neighbourhoods and vibrant public spaces

· Outcome 6: Thriving local economy with opportunities to learn, work and volunteer

32. The Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 recommends a licence term of five-year standard, with a further five year right of renewal.

33. The Puketāpapa Local Board may, at their discretion, choose to vary these recommendations on a case-by-case basis as they deem appropriate. The guidelines suggest that where a term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms contained in the guidelines.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. Iwi engagement was undertaken in March 2021 and involved email contact with 14 iwi/hapū who have an interest in the Puketāpapa area. The email contained detailed information on the land and food forest and invited iwi representatives to hui and/or for a kaitiaki site visit to comment on any spiritual, cultural or environmental impacts with respect to the land. No objections were raised.

35. Staff attended the Parks and Recreation Mana Whenua Central/South Forum on 31 March 2021 to discuss the proposed licence. No objections were raised.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. There are no financial implications to Auckland Council from the granting of a licence to the trust. Rent will be $1.00 plus GST per annum. The maintenance of the licenced area will be the responsibility of the trust.

37. This report was reviewed by the Puketāpapa Lead Financial Advisor and there are no financial implications in granting a proposed new licence to occupy to Whenua Warrior Charitable Trust.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. If a licence is not granted this will inhibit the trusts ability to provide its services to the local community.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. Subject to the Puketāpapa Local Board granting a licence to occupy council staff will work with key representatives of the trust to finalise the agreements.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Site Plan	77
b ⇩	Attachment B Community Outcomes Plan	79

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michelle Knudsen - Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe, General Manager Community Facilities

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Local Board Views on Plan Change 60 - Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters

File No.: CP2021/05901

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite the local board to provide its views on the council initiated Plan Change 60 – Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters (PC60).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers on a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local boards’ views on the plan change, if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

3. Each local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents, including plan changes. A local board can present local views and preferences when that view is expressed by the whole local board.^{^[1]}

4. On 28 January 2021, Auckland Council notified Plan Change 60. Submissions closed on 1 March 2021. The plan change includes 105 sites (in some cases, a site comprises more than one lot) and aims to rezone land to:

(a) recognise land recently vested or acquired as open space

(b) correct zoning errors or anomalies (including rezoning land to better reflect its use)

(d) facilitate Kāinga Ora’s and Auckland Council redevelopment of certain neighbourhoods.

5. One hundred and six submissions have been received on the proposed plan change. The vast majority of these oppose Panuku’s rezoning and land disposal. In summary there are 15 submissions in support of the plan change, four in support but seeking amendments, 85 in opposition and two out of scope.

6. No iwi authority has made a submission in support or opposition to Plan Change 60.

7. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on Plan Change 60 should it wish to do so. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) provide local board views on Plan Change 60 - Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters.

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on Plan Change 60.

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

Horopaki

Context

8. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents.^{^[2]}

9. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. Local board views are included in the analysis of the plan change, along with submissions.

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

11. This report provides an overview of the proposed plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), and a summary of submissions’ key themes.

12. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey, should the local board decide to convey its views on plan change 60. The planner must include any local board views in the evaluation of the plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

13. The key theme from submissions is opposition to the proposed rezonings relating to Kāinga Ora/Auckland Council redevelopment and Panuku’s land rationalisation and disposal. Attachment A identifies the land parcels that are the subject of submissions.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. Plan Change 60 affects land across the Auckland region.

15. The purpose of the proposed plan change is to rezone land to either:

(a) recognise land recently vested or acquired as open space

(b) correct zoning errors or anomalies (including rezoning land to better reflect its use)

(d) facilitate Kāinga Ora’s and Auckland Council redevelopment of certain neighbourhoods.

16. The Section 32 Report and details of the plan change are available from the council’s website at Plan Change 60. The council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· section 32 Report that accompanies the plan change

· submissions and

· the views and preferences of the local board, if the local board passes a resolution.

17. Submissions were made by 106 people/organisations as outlined below.

Submissions	Number of submissions
In support	15
In support but requesting change(s)	4
In opposition	85
Out of scope	2
Total	106

18. Key submission themes are listed below.

Oppose the rezoning of:

· 142 Triangle Road, Massey (Maps 4 & 37)

· 1-5 Lippiatt Road, Otahuhu (Map 73)

· 23 Waipuna Road, Mount Wellington (Map 75)

· 12R Rockfield Road, Ellerslie (Map 76)

· 11R Birmingham Road, Otara (Map 77)

· 2R Keeney Court, Papakura (Map 78)

· Walkway adjacent to 45 Brandon Road, Glen Eden (Map 79)

· 45 Georgina Street, Freemans Bay (Map 81)

· 36 Cooper Street, Grey Lynn (Map 82)

· 13 Davern Lane, New Lynn (Map 85)

· 67 East Street, Pukekohe (Map 86)

· Princes Street West, Pukekohe (Map 87)

· R105 Stott Avenue, Birkenhead (Map 93)

· 26 Princes Otahuhu (Map 96).

Support the rezoning but request an alternative zone:

· 2157 East Coast Road, Stillwater (Map 71).

Both support for and opposition to the rezoning:

· 50 Mayflower Close, Mangere East (Map 100)

· 62 Mayflower Close, Mangere East (Map 105).

Support for rezoning or further information required:

· 1337 Whangaparaoa Road, Army Bay (Map 104).

19. The key reasons for submission opposing the plan change include:

· opposed to the rezoning of pocket parks – they are needed to support intensification and for social and environmental benefits

· loss of valuable reserve land

· few parks in the area

· significant negative effect on enjoyment of our neighbourhood/ adverse effects on property and locality

· park has significant cultural heritage associations and natural value

· contradicts Auckland Unitary Plan heritage policies

· inadequate public notification

· green areas needed in more intensive housing areas

· contrary to climate change/greenhouse effects – green spaces are needed for low carbon Auckland Council

· inconsistent with Auckland Unitary Plan objectives and policies

· park has trees which will be lost with rezoning and development

· site is an overland flow path and flood plain

· property values will be adversely affected

· loss of walkway and critical linkage

· sale of spaces is desperate revenue gathering/selling due to Covid is short-sighted

· subsequent building will severely impact on sunlight and amenities of adjoining sites

· contrary to Auckland Council’s declaration of a climate emergency, open space network plans, National Policy Statement – Urban Development – well functioning environments, open space provision policy, Auckland Plan 2050, the Urban Ngahere Strategy

· site is a Significant Ecological Area and part of a wildlife corridor and refuge

· inconsistent with Local Boards goal of increasing tree canopy.

20. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from council’s website: Plan Change 60.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. Several submissions raised specific climate concerns. These relate to the loss of locally accessible open space and the associated vegetation, particularly mature trees.

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

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

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

23. The local board could consider if Plan Change 60:

· will reduce, increase or have no effect on Auckland’s overall greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. does it encourage car dependency, enhance connections to public transit, walking and cycling or support quality compact urban form)

· prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change. That is, does the proposed plan change elevate or alleviate climate risks (e.g. flooding, coastal and storm inundation, urban heat effect, stress on infrastructure).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. Panuku is a council-controlled organisation that resulted from the merging of Auckland Council Property Limited and Waterfront Auckland. One of the roles of Panuku is the release of land or properties that can be better utilised by others.

25. In conjunction with Auckland Council’s Stakeholder and Land Advisory team, Panuku have identified 26 council-owned parcels of land which are either surplus to requirements or they are part of a Panuku regeneration project (i.e. a series of projects and initiatives, designed to kickstart the transformation process and bring about changes that will help centres prosper in the future). Those parcels considered to be surplus to requirements have been cleared for sale by Auckland Council.

26. Auckland Council’s decision to dispose of or sell the land parcels is separate from the zoning of the land. Zoning is a method used to implement the Auckland Unitary Plan’s objectives and policies and to achieve the purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The merit of any rezoning of land (from open space to residential or business) therefore must be assessed against the purpose of the RMA and the relevant Auckland Unitary Plan objectives and policies. Other relevant considerations which will be considered in the section 42A hearing report include the Auckland Plan 2050, Auckland’s Climate Plan and the Urban Ngahere Strategy and open space network plans.

27. Auckland Transport made a submission in relation to the rezoning of 1337 Whangaparaoa Road, Army Bay. The key matter raised is the traffic effects of rezoning the Whangaparaoa Golf course from Residential – Single House to Open Space – Sport and Active Recreation zone.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. The plan change affects sites throughout the Auckland region and feedback is therefore sought from all local boards.

29. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view:

· interests and preferences of people in local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

· local board documents, such as the local board plan and local board agreement

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

30. A memo was sent to all local boards on 27 October 2020 outlining the proposed changes, the rational for them and the likely plan change timeframes.

31. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. If the local board chooses to provide its views on Plan Change 60 it may also comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori generally. In the 2018 census, approximately 11.5 per cent (or 181,194) of the Auckland region’s population identified as Māori.

33. Plans and Places consulted with all iwi authorities when it prepared Plan Change 60. On 27 October 2020, a memorandum outlining the draft proposed plan change was sent to all Auckland’s 19 mana whenua entities and the Tupuna Maunga Authority as required under the RMA.

34. Comments were received from:

· Ngāti Manuhiri – asking for an extension of time to 11 December 2020 to enable a discussion with their governance arm

· Waikato Tainui – they will support manawhenua to take the lead role on such plan changes

· Tupuna Maunga Authority – their interest is those sites that are within Height Sensitive Areas or regionally Significant Volcanic Viewshafts.

35. No iwi authorities made a formal submission.

36. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the RMA which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.^{^[3]} The plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan 2017.^{^[4]}

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

37. Panuku’s land rezoning and rationalisation (26 land parcels) is part of the Auckland Council’s financial recovery.

38. The draft Long-term Plan 2021-2031 proposes the selling of surplus properties and reinvesting the proceeds into critical infrastructure for the city. Over the next three years, Auckland Council is seeking to increase these sales to return $70 million a year to invest in Auckland.

39. The 26 land parcels that are part of this plan change form part of the $70 million return sought.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

· the mechanism for the local board to express its views and preferences if it so wishes

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

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

42. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s).^{^[5]} This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

44. The planner will advise the local boards of the decision on the plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	The land parcels in PC60 that are the subject of submissions	87

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tony Reidy - Team Leader Planning

Authorisers

Eryn Shields - Team Leader Regional, North West and Islands

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Economic Development Action Plan: Draft for feedback

File No.: CP2021/05906

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback on the draft Economic Development Action Plan: Council’s role in Auckland’s recovery 2021-24.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The council organisation and council-controlled organisations have worked collaboratively to develop the draft Economic Development Action Plan. This plan defines and agrees, for the next three years, the council family’s economic objectives and priorities and determines a coordinated course of action. The plan is limited to actions that are within the remit of council and council-controlled organisation (CCO) activities.

3. The draft plan aligns with the 10-year budget and will inform the work programmes of relevant council family departments. The work is supported by the chief executives of council and all substantive council-controlled organisations.

4. The draft plan outlines detailed actions within six areas of focus (‘workstreams’) as outlined in Attachment A. It reflects the guiding principles of transitioning towards a regenerative and low carbon economy, supporting economic opportunities for Māori, and responding to our communities of greatest need.

5. There will be targeted engagement on the draft plan, including with iwi, advisory panel members and business groups. Feedback will be sought until 14 June 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) receive the draft Economic Development Action Plan: Council’s role in Auckland’s recovery 2021-24.

b) provide feedback by 14 June 2021 for consideration in the final draft Economic Development Action Plan: Council’s role in Auckland’s recovery 2021-24.

Horopaki

Context

6. In August 2020, the CCO Review Panel delivered its report alongside 64 recommendations which were endorsed in full by the Governing Body. The review stated that council and all substantive council-controlled organisations (CCOs) should together define the economic outcomes for Auckland and agree on how to achieve and measure them. The review also acknowledged the need for better coordination and definition of responsibilities for local economic development within the council family. The Economic Development Action Plan forms part of council’s response to that review.

7. The plan is not a long-term strategy and does not replace the Economic Development Strategy 2012. The priorities and focus over the next three years, however, consider direction from council’s existing strategies i.e., the Auckland Plan 2050, Economic Development Strategy 2012, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan and Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau: Council’s Māori Outcomes Framework.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. Comprehensive background work to support the development of the action plan has been completed by the Chief Economist Unit (CEU), the Auckland Plan Strategy and Research Department (APSR) and Auckland Unlimited. This includes a report from the CEU providing a profile of Auckland’s economy over the last 10 years, the impact of Covid-19 on the Auckland economy, and the main roadblocks to recovery. The same report also identified areas where the council group can have a material impact on economic development. Key areas are:

· assets

· procurement

· land use and zoning

· regulatory processes

· travel network

· town centres

· pricing

· skills and investment attraction

· tourism attraction

· social support services

· coordination of responses through partnerships.

9. There has also been an extensive review of plans and strategies across the council and CCOs to identify common economic development themes. These were: innovation and technology, Māori economy, regenerative, resilient, low carbon economy, workforce transition, competitive high-value sectors, local economic development, infrastructure, and culture and creativity.

10. This background work formed the basis for six workstreams:

· Destination Tāmaki Makaurau: attracting people and investment

· Local Tāmaki Makaurau: enabling thriving local economies

· Skilled Tāmaki Makaurau: supporting quality jobs and skill development

· Future Tāmaki Makaurau: preparing businesses for the future

· Enabled Tāmaki Makaurau: infrastructure enabling economic development

· Enabled Tāmaki Makaurau: regulations that enable economic development.

11. Each workstream has both council and CCO staff representation. These workstreams have developed a set of actions with responsibilities and timeframes as detailed in this draft plan. A monitoring framework will be developed to ensure roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of council and each CCO are clearly defined as they relate to the actions in the draft plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

12. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan has provided direction to the development of the draft plan, aspiring to a more resilient economy that is regenerative, inclusive, local and enables Aucklanders to thrive.

13. The draft action plan has embedded the guiding principle of ‘transitioning to a regenerative and low carbon economy’ into each of its six workstreams. The development of actions is underpinned by kaitiakitanga and considers how resources used give back to nature and increase value through reuse and renewal. Where applicable, actions broadly encourage a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions, low carbon products and services, climate innovation, and less dependency on natural resources.

14. The actions presented in this draft action plan will go through a further climate impact assessment using tools developed by the Chief Sustainability Office. The results of this assessment will be incorporated into the final plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. The draft plan responds to the CCO review recommendation for council and all CCOs to together define the economic outcomes for Auckland and agree on how to achieve and measure them. The actions in the draft plan will be shared and accountabilities of council and each CCO well defined. Some CCOs will have a more active role than others.

16. The scope and development of the Economic Development Action Plan has been agreed to through the council and CCO Chief Executives’ group. This group is updated with progress on the plan as appropriate. The project team includes a representative and contribution from each CCO.

17. The scope of the plan is limited to actions that are within the remit of council and CCO activities. A review and discussion document of the council group’s levers that materially contribute to economic development formed the basis for this draft plan (refer to Attachment B).

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

Local impacts and local board views

18. Each workstream of the plan will have a local impact, acknowledging the interdependency of local economies and the regional economy. The draft plan includes the focus area ‘Local Tāmaki Makaurau: enabling thriving local economies’ and has been informed by the recent local board plans’ local economic priorities.

19. The Local Tāmaki Makaurau workstream seeks to clarify what the Auckland Council group will do to support the local economies of Auckland. This includes setting out the roles that each part of the group plays in delivering actions, while also setting the foundations to help the group identify the economic places (sub-regional and local) of Auckland and deliver outcomes at the local level.

20. A memo was distributed on 17 February 2021 to inform local board members of the development of council’s Economic Development Action Plan 2021-24 and to outline the process for local board feedback to the plan. At the request of the local board chairpersons, the draft plan will be provided at all local board business meetings in May 2021 with written feedback by formal resolution provided to the project leads by 14 June 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau has provided direction to the development of the draft plan, in particular, the Kia ora te Umanga mahi objective of supporting economic opportunities for Māori businesses and iwi organisations. The draft plan has also considered direction from the Auckland Plan 2050, the Kaitiaki Forum’s strategic plan and the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Issues of Significance (2017) as they relate to Māori economic development.

22. The draft action plan has embedded the guiding principle of ‘supporting economic opportunities for Māori’ into each of its six workstreams. The development of actions will consider partnership opportunities with mana whenua and mataawaka, a focus on equity and addressing systemic barriers, and identifying new economic opportunities for Māori.

23. The project team have communicated with iwi from the commencement of the project to determine and initiate the preferred process of engagement for each iwi. This draft plan will be sent to all iwi for input and feedback through to 14 June 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. The scope of the Economic Development Action Plan states that actions will be funded within the existing 10-year Budget 2021-2031 and therefore, no additional funding is required. The draft plan identifies some actions that rely on external funding sources and partnerships.

25. At the advice of the finance division, budget alignment is demonstrated in the draft plan at both the group of activity and CCO / council directorate level.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. The draft plan outlines actions that require a commitment from the responsible directorate to include in their work programmes and within their existing budgets. The monitoring framework will include regular progress reporting to ensure effective implementation of the action plan.

27. This action plan is an internal document, outlining work to be done within the remit of council and its CCOs. The content of the plan builds on earlier consultation undertaken in the development of key strategies that have provided direction. Input and feedback for this action plan has therefore been targeted to key groups.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. The draft plan will be distributed to the key groups that have been engaged from the commencement of the project. Feedback will be considered until 14 June 2021.

29. The final Economic Development Action Plan: Council’s role in Auckland’s recovery 2021-24 and its monitoring framework will be presented to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events committee on 8 July 2021 for adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Economic Development Action Plan	95
b ⇩	Auckland's economic recovery and council's role	129

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Janelle Breckell - Principal Strategic Advisor

James Robinson – Head of Strategy and Planning – Auckland Unlimited

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 May 2021

Decision-making responsibilities policy

File No.: CP2021/06197

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse the draft decision-making responsibilities policy for inclusion in the long-term plan.

This report was deferred from the Puketāpapa Local Board extra ordinary meeting of 06 May 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Governing Body is required by legislation to allocate decision-making responsibility for the non-regulatory activities of Auckland Council to either itself or local boards. This allocation is outlined in the Decision-Making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and Local Boards policy that is published in each long-term plan and annual plan.

3. The policy also records delegations given to date by the Governing Body to local boards and provides a list of statutory responsibilities that are conferred on both governance arms.

4. An internal review of the policy was undertaken in early 2021 and considered by the Joint Governance Working Party at its meeting on 22 March 2021. The review outlined some proposed changes to the policy as well as some recommendations on how to take forward other issues that do not yet lend themselves to a policy amendment. The recommendations adopted by the Joint Governance Working Party have informed the proposed changes in the draft policy. (Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) endorse the draft Decision-making Responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and local boards policy.

Horopaki

Context

5. The Governing Body and local boards obtain their decision-making responsibilities from three sources:

· statutory responsibilities - functions and powers directly conferred by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) 2009

· non-regulatory activities that are allocated to local boards and the Governing Body in accordance with a set of principles (section 17(2) LGACA)

· delegations – these can be regulatory or non-regulatory responsibilities; the Governing Body has delegated some of its responsibilities to local boards.

Allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities

6. The primary purpose for the policy is to set out the allocation of non-regulatory decision-making responsibilities. However, it incorporates other sources of decision-making authority for completeness and context, including a register of key delegations which have been given by the Governing Body to local boards.

Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP)

7. To facilitate a review by the JGWP, staff provided an analysis of issues raised, mainly by local boards, and proposed recommendations in relation to those issues. The report containing this advice can be found in the record of the Joint Governance Working Party Meeting, 23 March 2021.

8. The JGWP carefully considered the issues that were in scope for the review as well as the staff advice and raised some questions and issues that staff are exploring further. These are discussed in the advice below.

9. This report only covers the discussions relating to the recommended changes to the policy. A memo will be provided to each local board providing a summary of the issues considered in the review and outlining a staff response to specific issues, if any, that individual local boards raised in their feedback.

10. Following their review, the JGWP agreed as follows:

That the Joint Governance Working Party:

(a) note the feedback from local boards on the decision-making responsibilities policy

(b) request the following amendments to the decision-making responsibilities policy:

(i) request that staff report with urgency that local boards can be delegated approval for developing and approving area plans, provided the Governing Body can make its views known on such plans

(ii) that the local boards can take responsibilities for decision making over drainage reserves provided such decisions are constrained to those that will not negatively affect the drainage functions and stormwater network operations.

(iii) provide for local boards to tailor locally delivered projects within regional environmental programmes, subject to advice from staff on the types of projects that can be tailored

(iv) provide explicit reference to Health and Safety obligations and requirements that local boards and Governing Body must consider in their decisions

(v) local boards can object to a special liquor licence and this be enabled by an appropriate administrative process.

(c) note the recommendations that the next phase of the Waiheke pilot should consider some of the issues that have been raised including:

(i) trialing delegations from Auckland Transport on decision-making relating to street trading for roads and beaches, placemaking and urban design decisions

(ii) Identifying opportunities and non-regulatory decision-making elements in relation to town centres that the Governing Body can consider when making allocation

(d) recommend that Auckland Transport consider if there are types of community activities that can take place on road reserves without impacting the roading network.

(e) request staff scope out a review of the role of the Governing Body in regional governance within the shared governance model of Auckland Council, taking into considerations the recommendation of the CCO Review.

The following members requested that their dissenting votes be recorded as follows:

Cr A Filipaina against e)

Member R Northey against e)

The following members requested that their abstention be recorded as follows

Cr S Henderson against (b)(i)

Cr R Hills against (b)(iii)

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Request for further advice or implementation support

Area plans

11. Local boards requested that the responsibility for adoption of area plans, which is currently allocated to the Governing Body, be assigned to them. This can be done through allocating the responsibility to local boards or through the Governing Body delegating this allocated responsibility to local boards to exercise on their behalf.

12. Staff have considered this request and advised the JGWP as follows.

· Area plans are an important tool in council’s spatial planning framework. It is used to strategically plan an area usually for the purpose of seeking and/or supporting changes to the Unitary Plan. The responsibility for the Unitary Plan rests with the Governing Body.

· Area plans, as a stand-alone non-regulatory tool and decision, appear ‘local’ in nature given their focus on local planning which is a responsibility allocated to local boards.

· However, area plans also meet the exceptions in section 17(2) of the LGACA: specifically that for these decisions to be effective, they require alignment or integration with other decision-making responsibilities that sit with the Governing Body. These include plan changes and amendments to the Unitary Plan, infrastructure prioritisation and regional investment.

· During the Waiheke pilot, the Waiheke Local Board sought a delegation to sign off the Waiheke Local Area Plan. This delegation was granted with conditions that included a requirement to ensure the involvement of a member of the Independent Maori Statutory Board. This suggests delegations on a case-by-case basis can be possible and provides an alternative route if a standing delegation is not given to local boards.

13. The JGWP carefully considered the advice of staff but were not all in agreement with it. Members had strong views about the need to empower local boards in their local planning role and have requested staff to reconsider their advice and to explore the risks and possible risk mitigation of enabling local boards to adopt the plans through a delegation from the Governing Body.

14. Whilst the practice already ensures high involvement of local boards in the development of these plans, it was the view of the JGWP members that delegating the adoption decision with relevant parameters is more empowering for local boards. JGWP members felt that this would enable local boards to make local planning decisions that are aligned with their local board plan aspirations and other community priorities without requiring further approval from the Governing Body, whose members may not be as familiar with these local priorities.

15. JGWP members agreed that area plans, while local, often require funding and alignment to other plans that are developed by the Governing Body. Keeping the responsibility and accountability allocated to the Governing Body ensures the decision continues to sit at the right level but that this does not necessarily need to be exercised by the Governing Body on all occasions.

16. The JGWP have requested advice from staff on how to pursue a Governing Body delegation. Staff will seek to provide further advice to the JGWP. If the JGWP considers recommending a delegation from the Governing Body on this issue, staff will present the request to the Governing Body for consideration. A delegation can be given at any time and it will have immediate effect.

Special liquor licence administration process for notifying local boards

17. One of the issues raised in the local board feedback is special liquor license applications. On this matter, the request was for clarification that local boards can object, as per the delegation from Governing Body granting the ability to make objections under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. Elected members perceived this is not being enabled as notifications on these licences are not proactively shared with them in the same way that information about other applications (on, off and club licences) are.

18. The JGWP has recommended that this be clarified in the policy and request that staff enable notifications to be sent to local board where public consultation is required for special licence applications.

Proposed changes to the Allocated decision-making responsibilities (part c)

Local purpose (drainage) reserves

19. During discussions with local boards on the scope of the review, many local boards raised concerns about the interpretation of the policy.

20. An example raised by Upper Harbour Local Board demonstrated the need for clarity, especially in areas where decision-making authority allocated to both governance arms overlap. During the development of the board’s local park management plans, staff had advised that those reserves that are primarily dedicated to stormwater drainage should be treated as part of the stormwater network. This advice appeared to suggest that local boards do not hold any decision-making over a subset of local parks since it is the Governing Body that is responsible for management of the stormwater network.

21. Through discussions with staff as part of this review, the advice has been revised. Staff accept this is an example of where there is clear overlap in activities and decision-making responsibilities. Staff will need to work closely with local boards to develop protocols that enable decision-making by the Governing Body on stormwater issues to be exercised efficiently and effectively.

22. The JGWP were supportive of the staff recommendation to clarify that the exercise of decision-making in relation to stormwater network and how it functions must be properly enabled on local parks. This is done by acknowledging that these considerations and decisions about the stormwater network constrains local board decision-making over local parks (or parts of local parks) that have a stormwater drainage function. This clarity will also help staff to understand that the local board continues to retain the decision-making responsibility over all other activities of local parks.

Role of local boards in environmental programmes and grants

23. Some local boards feel the current policy wording and ways of working does not provide a meaningful role for local boards on regional environmental issues, specifically regional environmental programmes. These local boards have also requested that local boards be enabled to monitor the progress of any locally-delivered projects (funded by regional environmental programmes) through the established work programme reporting mechanism.

24. Local board input into regional environmental programmes is at the policy and/or programme approval stage. The approved programme direction provides sufficient guidance to staff, acting under delegation from the Governing Body, when developing an implementation plan and prioritising projects for delivery.

25. At the operational level, where identified priorities and project ideas are to be delivered in local parks or other key locations within the local board area, local board input is sought by staff at workshops. This is to ensure locally delivered projects are tailored to local circumstances. While it is possible to capture this current practice in the policy, this needs to be done in a way that continues to enable relevant local boards to add value to projects without too many administrative requirements. A member of the JGWP also expressed concern about signalling all projects can be tailored to local circumstances as this is not the case.

Other changes

Health and Safety – parameters for decision-making

26. Council decisions need to take account of Health and Safety considerations, as well as reflecting a shared approach to risk.

27. Staff advise that Health and Safety considerations should be explicit in the policy to protect the council from liability. The JGWP supports this recommendation and a reference to complying with health and safety legislation and plans has been inserted in the policy.

Issues relating to delegations

28. The review considered requests for new delegations or additional support to implement delegations given to local boards. Some of these were requests for delegation from Auckland Transport.

29. The review considered that before recommending or agreeing any new delegation, the delegator, whether it be Governing Body or Auckland Transport, must first weigh the benefits of reflecting local circumstances and preferences (through a delegation) against the importance and benefits of using a single approach in the district (through itself retaining the responsibility, duty, or power concerned).

30. Staff advised the JGWP to recommend that the Waiheke pilot (part of the Governance Framework Review) which is about to enter another phase, expands to include a trial of delegated decision-making on key issues raised in this review. They include several issues that relate to Auckland Transport, namely street trading and town centre/urban design. Piloting these delegations can help Auckland Transport to identify any practical issues that need to be considered before a formal delegation to all local boards can be given on any of the issues identified.

Other issues

JGWP resolution on role of Governing Body

31. Some members of the JGWP expressed concerns about what they perceived to be a heavy focus on local board responsibilities.

32. Both sets of governors were invited to identify issues to be examined in the review. The Governing Body, in workshop discussions, did not identify any major issues that it wanted to review but was open to including any issues raised by local boards. As a result, almost all of the issues raised were suggested by local boards and the majority of them relate to their areas of decision-making responsibility. This may have given the impression of a bias towards examining the role of local boards.

33. To address this concern, the JGWP requested that staff scope a review of the role of the Governing Body. Staff will provide advice to the JGWP in response to this request at an upcoming meeting.

Escalation process for any disputes relating to the Allocation of decision-making responsibilities for non-regulatory activities

34. The process for resolving disputes relating to allocation of non-regulatory responsibilities (including disputes over interpretation of the allocation table) will vary depending on the issue at hand. The chart below outlines the basic escalation process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. This report relates to a policy and does not have any quantifiable climate impacts.

36. Decisions that are taken, in execution of this policy, will likely have significant climate impacts. However, those impacts will be assessed on a case-by-case basis and appropriate responses will be identified as required.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37. Council departments support and implement decisions that are authorised by this policy.

38. Feedback received to date from some departments reinforces the need for guidance notes to aid interpretation of the allocations in the decision-making policy. This work will be done in consultation with departments.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39. This report canvasses issues that had been raised by local boards and focuses on those issues that warrant an amendment to the policy.

40. All other issues raised by local boards in their feedback were canvassed in the staff advice that formed part of the review. This information is available to all local boards.

41. Staff have also prepared responses to specific issues raised by local boards and have shared this information in a memo.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

42. There are no decisions being sought in this report that will have a specific impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

43. There are no financial implications directly arising from the information contained in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. The are no identified risks other than timeframes. The Governing Body will be adopting this policy in June as part of the Long-term Plan. Local board feedback is requested in early May in order to provide time to collate and present this to the Governing Body for consideration.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Staff will prepare guidance notes to aid the interpretation of the decision-making policy following its adoption.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Decision making responsibilities policy	157

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Statement of Proposal (Under Separate Cover)

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Chair, Julie Fairey's Report	177

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

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

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

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

Chairperson	Julie Fairey
Deputy Chairperson	Jon Turner
Members	Harry Doig
	Ella Kumar, JP
	Fiona Lai
	Bobby Shen

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Harry Doig's Member Report, 01 April - 30 April 2021	183
b ⇩	Ella Kumar's Member Report, 01 March - 30 April 2021	185
c ⇩	Fiona Lai's Member Report, 01 March - 30 April 2021	191
d ⇩	Bobby Shen's Member Report, April 2021	195
e ⇩	Jonathan Turner's Member Report, 01 April - 30 April 2021	199

Author	Selina Powell - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager