Agenda of Howick Local Board - Monday, 19 July 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 Howick Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 17 June 2021, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

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

8.1 Pump track proposal for Lloyd Elsmore Park

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Hayden, a member of the Mountain Raiders BMX Club’s committee will be in attendance to present to the Board a proposal for a pump track in Lloyd Elsmore Park.

2. Further context and background information to the proposal is included in Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from the Mountain Raiders BMX Club and thank them for their attendance.

Attachments

a Pump Track Proposal - Background information........................................... 69

8.2 Howick Residents & Ratepayers Association environmental presentation to the Howick Local Board

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Matthew Brajkovich, Chair of the Howick Residents & Ratepayers Association will be in attendance to provide an updated presentation to the Board on the environment and request assistance in relation to sewer issues in the Howick Local Board area.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) receive the deputation from the Howick Residents & Ratepayers Association and thank them for their attendance.

9 Public Forum

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

9.1 Off-lead area for dogs at Mangemangeroa Reserve

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Anila Sing will be in attendance to raise her views with the Board for an off-lead area for dogs at Mangemangeroa Reserve within the Howick Local Board area.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) thank Anila Sing for her attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Howick Local Board

19 July 2021

Auckland Transport July 2021 update to Howick Local Board

File No.: CP2021/10066

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Howick Local Board about transport related matters.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. No decision is required this month. This report contains information about the following:

· Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP)

· Auckland Transport Southern Hub

· Auckland Transport (AT) local and regional projects and activities.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport July 2021 report.

Horopaki

Context

3. Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. Auckland Transport reports on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in the existing local board Engagement Plan. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

4. This section of the report contains information about local projects, issues and initiative. It provides summaries of the detailed advice and analysis provided to the local board during workshops and briefings.

Auckland Transport Southern Hub

5. In December 2020, AT reviewed its’ communications and engagement team. As a consequence of this and as part of the response to recommendations in the Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) review, four sub-regional hubs were established. The southern hub covers, Manurewa, Papakura, Franklin, Howick, Otara/Papatoetoe and Otahuhu/Mangere.

6. Staffing for the Southern hub comprised of:

· Head of Community Engagement (South)

· two Elected Members Relationship Managers

· two Senior Communications Partners

· Senior Engagement Partner

· Community and BID Engagement partner.

8. As part of the review AT and Local Board services are reviewing the way AT (and other CCOs’) report. As this process is taking some time, reporting in the previous format has resumed. Though the reporting will be every two months in the interim.

Regional Land Transport Plan

9. The finalised $37 billion investment plan has been approved by Auckland Transport’s Board of Directors – as the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031.The record investment – the largest in Auckland Transport’s history – sets out a plethora of projects over the next decade all across Tāmaki Makaurau.

10. Auckland Transport received 5818 public submissions during the RLTP consultation, with overall support for the direction of the RLTP, and in particular - strong support for investment in public transport.

11. The 10-year plan focuses on areas which AT, Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency and KiwiRail will respond to help address our region’s transport challenges. All of Auckland’s 21 local boards provided submissions on the RLTP – which was also endorsed for approval by all Auckland councillors.

12. Of the $37 billion invested into the RLTP, 50 per cent goes towards capital expenditure, with 50 per cent for maintenance, operations and renewals. The share of funding for new projects can be broken down into:

· public transport and environmental – 49 per cent

· strategic and local roads – 24 per cent

· walking and cycling – eight per cent

· spatial priorities – seven per cent

· safety – six per cent

· optimisation and technology – four per cent.

13. The projects in the 2021-2031 RLTP will provide some transformational improvements to the way we move around Tāmaki Makaurau. People will have better access to the rapid transit network through projects like the City Rail Link (CRL) and the Eastern Busway. Auckland Transport will also deliver 200 km of new and upgraded cycleways and shared paths. All of this investment will give people more travel options and reduce how much we have to rely on our cars.

14. The RLTP reflects and aligns the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan, and the objectives and recommendations of four separate, but interconnected plans undergoing a refresh which are: the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP), the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 (LTP), the Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) and the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport.

15. There were some changes to the timing of capital funding to ensure that Auckland Council remained financial prudent. At its next briefing the Eastern Busway Alliance will update the local board on this, along with project progress.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

16. Through Auckland Councils’ Long-term Plan 2021-2031 and Auckland Transports’ Regional Land Transport Plan the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) was confirmed as $20 million per year, for the 21 Local Boards. This is at the same level as pre-Covid budgets.

17. Howick Local Board’s allocation is $1,677,177 for the 2021/2022 financial year, with the same amount for the 2022/2023 financial year. The Board will hold an initial workshop on 29 July 2021 to prioritise potential projects for these funds.

18. It is strongly recommended that the Board allocate both years budgets to ensure that investigation and planning for these projects can begin as soon as practical.

School Speed Trial

19. Four Auckland primary schools will soon become a safer destination for children and parents with new safer 30 km/h speeds. Auckland schools Grey Lynn Primary, Glenfield Primary, Birkdale Primary and Summerland Primary school are part of Auckland Transport’s Safe School Speeds programme.

20. The project – which is part of the wider Innovating Streets for People Programme – involves schools working with Auckland Transport to introduce new speed calming measures such as kerbside extensions, speed humps, and new painted surfaces to keep children safe.

Auckland Transport’s $20 Fare Cap

21. On 23 May 2021, AT introduced a $20 fare cap on public transport. Customers are be able to travel all day on trains, buses and ferries tagging on and off with their AT HOP card, and never pay more than $20. The only exclusions are mid and outer-harbour ferries, Waiheke ferry and Skybus services. Bayswater, Birkenhead, Northcote Point and Devonport Inner Harbour ferries are included.

22. With the fare cap its now not necessary to pay in advance for a whole day of travel. The system is automatic, so, as long as customers tag on and off with their AT HOP card, they will not be charged more than $20 no matter how many train, bus and inner harbour ferries are taken on the same day (to end of service). Fare Daily Cap testing has been undertaken since 11 April 2021 and completed on 23 April 2021 after two full testing cycles.

23. All AT HOP customers were informed via electronic marketing.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. Auckland Transport engages closely with the council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and council’s priorities.

25. Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The impact of information (or decisions) in this report are confined to AT and do not impact on other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27. The purpose of this report is to inform the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28. There are no impacts specific to Māori for this reporting period. Auckland Transport is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi-the Treaty of Waitangi-and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

29. Auckland Transport’s Maori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to with 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them.

30. This plan in full is available on the AT’s Website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about

31. An update on AT’s role in climate change will be reported to the September 2021 meeting.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33. Risks are managed as part of each AT project.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

34. Auckland Transport will continue to update the Board through memos and workshops. A full report will go to the September business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Bruce Thomas – Elected Members Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 July 2021

Draft proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw

File No.: CP2021/09854

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek support on the draft proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls before it is finalised for public consultation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to decide whether to support a proposal to make a new signs bylaw and associated controls, staff have prepared a draft proposal.

3. The draft proposal is the culmination of decisions by the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport on the review of the current Signage Bylaw 2015. These decisions were made at meetings to consider the review’s findings in June 2020 and options in October 2020 and April 2021 and provided direction on the content of the draft proposal.

4. The draft proposal would continue to enable council to manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places^{^[1]}, the Auckland transport system and environment.

5. The main draft proposals in comparison to the current bylaws about signs are to:

· combine the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013

· increase the current portable sign prohibited area to cover the entire City Centre Zone

· increase the maximum area of flat wall-mounted signs in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m² (currently 2.88m² for sale of a property and 5m² for goods, services or events)

· retain the intent of the rules in the current bylaws (unless otherwise stated) in a way that is up to date and more certain

· use a bylaw structure, format and wording more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and current council drafting standards.

6. Staff recommend that the local board support the draft proposal.

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

8. Local board support on the draft proposal will help develop a proposal for the Regulatory Committee to recommend to the Governing Body and for the Board of Auckland Transport. Public consultation is scheduled for September and October, deliberations for March 2022 and a final Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport decision for April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) support the draft Statement of Proposal in Attachment A of this agenda report to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls for public consultation.

Horopaki

Context

The draft proposed Bylaw and controls regulate most signs in Auckland

9. The draft proposed new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls seek to manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, Auckland transport system and environment.

10. The draft proposed new bylaw and controls:

· would continue to provide for signs related to activities on the same property as long as they meet certain conditions for their design, construction and duration of display

· would continue to limit signs unrelated to the day-to-day activities on the land it is located (for example signs on footpaths)

· would continue to provide more opportunities to display signs about elections, polls and referendums during an election period that would not normally be allowed

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

· would remain part of a wider regulatory framework^{^[2]}

· must be adopted using a public consultative process and commence before 28 May 2022 to avoid a regulatory gap (the Signage Bylaw 2015 expires on 28 May 2022).

The proposal is the outcome of a statutory review of the current signage bylaw

11. The Regulatory Committee (Committee) and Board of Auckland Transport (Board) requested staff commence the process to make a new bylaw and controls following a statutory review of the Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Signage Bylaw 2015 (refer diagram below).

Diagram One: 2015 Signage Bylaw review process

12. Staff have prepared a draft proposal to implement the decision of the Committee and Board (Attachment A). The draft proposal includes the reasons and decisions which led to the proposed new bylaw and controls and provides a comparison between the current bylaws and the proposed new bylaw and controls.

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

13. The local board has an opportunity to support the draft proposal in Attachment A by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and the Board of Auckland Transport before it is finalised for public consultation.

14. The Board could support the draft proposal for public consultation, recommend changes or defer comment until after it has considered public feedback on the proposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft proposal improves how council manages signs in Auckland

15. The draft proposal makes a new bylaw and controls about signs to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, Auckland transport system and environment.

16. The table below summarises the main proposals in comparison to the current bylaws:

Table One: Main proposals and reasonings

Main proposals	Reasons for proposals
· to make a new bylaw and associated controls that combine the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013 · the current bylaws will be revoked.	· reduce confusion from having two bylaws about signs · clarify intention to provide more opportunities to display election signs during pre-election periods than would otherwise be allowed for a sign that does not relate to activities on the property.
· to increase the current portable sign prohibited area to cover the entire City Centre Zone.	· prioritise the area for pedestrians and place-making activities · remove potential safety risks, nuisance and clutter · improve accessibility for mobility and vision-impaired pedestrians.
· to increase the maximum area of flat wall-mounted signs in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m².	· allow more visible display of information in an area which has a larger built form and a lower priority on amenity values. (current maximum is 2.88m² for sale of a property and 5m² for goods, services or events on a property).
· to retain the intent of the rules in the current bylaws (unless otherwise stated) in a way that is up to date and more certain.	· retain the effect of rules considered to still be appropriate · ensure rules are current, clear, and easier to understand and comply with.
· to use a bylaw structure, format and wording more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and current council drafting standards.	· ensure rules are easier to understand and comply with · comply with current council bylaw drafting standards · assist future reviews of the Auckland Unitary Plan in relation to the most appropriate distribution of sign rules.

The draft proposal complies with statutory requirements

17. The draft new bylaw and controls has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements to:

· help manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment

· use a structure, format and wording that are easier to read, understand and comply with than the current bylaws about signs and meet current council bylaw drafting standards

· be authorised by statute, not be repugnant to other legislation, or be unreasonable

· not give rise to any implications and not be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act

· not be inconsistent with other Acts, regulations and bylaws (refer footnote 2).

Staff recommend the local board support the draft proposal

18. Staff recommend that the local board consider whether to support the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. The draft proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations. This includes Auckland Council’s Licencing and Regulatory Compliance Unit and Parks, Sports and Recreation Department, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku and Auckland Transport.

21. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the draft proposal and their implementation role, and the proposal is being developed jointly with Auckland Transport.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The draft proposal impacts local governance, for example it regulates signs about community events and signs on local facilities and parks.

23. Representative local board views were provided in April 2021 through a joint working group established by the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.^{^[3]} Group members unanimously supported a new bylaw and controls that would be more aligned to the Auckland Unitary Plan and provided suggestions on the detailed content of the Bylaw.^{^[4]}

24. The Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport considered these views on 20 April 2021 (REG/2021/20) (29/04/2021:18). The Committee and Board directed staff to draft a new bylaw and controls. Group suggestions on detailed content have been considered in preparing the draft proposal.

25. This report gives the local board an opportunity to provide its support on the draft proposal by resolution to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport.

26. The local board will have further opportunity to provide its views to a Bylaw Panel on how the Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal related to its local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The proposal contributes to the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and the Auckland Plan 2050’s Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome by supporting Māori who want to make their businesses uniquely identifiable and visible.

28. The proposal also helps protect all people living in Tāmaki Makaurau from the potential harms and nuisances that signs can cause.

29. People identifying as Māori presented views during the 2015 signage bylaw review. This feedback primarily identified ways to improve inappropriate signage standards. The draft proposal addresses those views by clarifying and updating standards.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. The following risk has been identified in the table below.

Table Two: Risks and Mitigations

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The draft proposal or the local board’s support do not reflect the view of people in the local board area.	There may be negative views about the council’s process to develop the proposal.	The local board will have an opportunity to consider any public feedback and provide its formal views to a Bylaw Panel on how the Panel should address the matters raised in the feedback prior to the final decision being made.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. Staff will present a proposal and any local board support to the Regulatory Committee and Board of Auckland Transport in August 2021.

34. If at any time a joint bylaw is not able to progress, Auckland Council will continue to progress a bylaw for sign-related matters it is responsible for.

35. If the Governing Body of Auckland Council and the Board of Auckland Transport decide to proceed with a joint bylaw, the subsequent steps include public consultation, local board views on public feedback, Bylaw Panel deliberations and a final decision by the Governing Body of Auckland Council and Board of Auckland Transport (refer to the diagram in Context).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Draft proposal for new signs bylaw and controls (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Victor Faletutulu - Graduate Policy Advisor

Steve Hickey - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 July 2021

Resource management system reform: Natural and Built Environment Bill exposure draft submission

File No.: CP2021/10221

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide information on Auckland Council’s upcoming submission on the Natural and Built Environments Act exposure draft and invite local board input.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The government is undertaking comprehensive reform of the Resource Management Act (RMA).

3. Cabinet has agreed to the repeal and replacement of the RMA with three pieces of legislation: a Natural and Built Environments Act, a Spatial Planning Act, and a Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act.

4. The first area of focus is the proposed Natural and Built Environments Bill. Key aspects of this have been released in an exposure draft which will form the basis of a select committee inquiry. Submissions on the inquiry close on 4 August 2021. A copy of the paper can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/natural-and-built-environments-bill-parliamentary-paper-on-the-exposure-draft/

5. The Natural and Built Environments Bill and Spatial Planning Bill are likely to be introduced in early 2022 and are expected to be in place by early 2023.

6. Auckland Council will make a submission on the bill and local board input into the Auckland Council submission is sought by 26 July 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Natural and Built Environments Bill exposure draft for inclusion in the Auckland Council submission, noting that local boards feedback is required by close of business on 26 July 2021 for inclusion in the council submission.

Horopaki

Context

Resource management system reform

7. The government is undertaking comprehensive reform of the resource management system.

8. The first stage of this reform was a review which started in 2019 by The Resource Management Review Panel (the panel). The panel reported back to the Minister for the Environment in June 2020 in its report, New Directions for Resource Management in New Zealand. The report set out a proposed future resource management system, including indicative drafting of legislation for key provisions.

9. Through this, the council arrived at various positions through its submission to the panel which staff will use to guide submission development on the next stages of reform.

10. After receiving the panel’s report, Cabinet decided to proceed with Resource Management Act reform largely modelled on the panel’s recommendations.

11. Cabinet agreed to the following objectives for reform:

· protect and, where necessary, restore the natural environment, including its capacity to provide for the wellbeing of present and future generations

· better enable development within environmental biophysical limits, including a significant improvement in housing supply, affordability and choice, and timely provision of appropriate infrastructure, including social infrastructure

· give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and provide greater recognition of te ao Māori, including mātauranga Māori

· better prepare for adapting to climate change and risks from natural hazards and better mitigate emissions contributing to climate change

· improve system efficiency and effectiveness and reduce complexity while retaining appropriate local democratic input.

12. Cabinet agreed to the repeal and replacement of the RMA with three pieces of legislation (names may be subject to change):

· the Natural and Built Environments Act (NBA) to provide for land use and environmental regulation (this would be the primary replacement for the current RMA)

· the Strategic Planning Act (SPA) to integrate with other legislation relevant to development (such as the Local Government Act and Land Transport Management Act) and require long-term regional spatial strategies

· the Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act (CAA) to enable and address issues associated with managed retreat and funding and financing adaptation.

13. It is intended that the NBA and SPA be introduced to Parliament by early 2022, with their passage through the house likely to take around a year.

The NBA exposure draft and select committee inquiry process

14. This exposure draft of the NBA has been released to enable early public engagement on some aspects of the proposed legislation and inform the development of the final bill. This will be conducted through a select committee inquiry.

15. The purpose of the inquiry is to provide feedback on the extent to which the provisions in the exposure draft of the Natural and Built Environments Bill will support the resource management reform objectives stated in paragraph 11.

16. The scope of the select committee inquiry is limited to:

· matters covered by the exposure draft or in the support material

· collating a list of ideas for making the new system more efficient, more proportionate to the scale and/or risks associated with given activities, more affordable for the end user, and less complex compared to the current system.

17. There are many aspects of the final NBA which are not in the exposure draft. The council will have an opportunity to submit on these matters when the final NBA bill is introduced in early 2022. These matters include:

· process to develop the National Planning Framework

· consenting

· existing use rights

· allocation of resources and economic instruments

· compliance, monitoring and enforcement

· water conservation orders

· heritage orders

· designations

· subdivision

· transitional provisions

· provision for urban design, including urban tree cover

· the function and roles of ministers and agencies, as well as regional councils and territorial authorities in the system.

18. The inquiry is open for public submission with a closing date of 4 August 2021. The select committee will report back to the Minister for the Environment by 18 October 2021.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of the Natural and Built Environments Act exposure draft

19. The exposure draft contains the proposed clauses relating to:

· key definitions

· purpose and related provisions (including the concept of Te Oranga o te Taiao)

· Te Tiriti o Waitangi

· environmental limits including their purpose and key requirements

· environmental outcomes which the National Planning Framework and all Natural and Built Environments Plans must promote

· implementation principles

· aspects of the Natural and Built Environments Plans (NBEPs) including what they are to contain and the nature of the committees which are proposed to develop them. These plans would take place at a regional level and replace current land use environmental plans e.g. the Auckland Unitary Plan.

· aspects of the National Planning Framework (NPF) including what outcomes must be covered by it, and the mechanism for its development. This framework would replace the current system of national direction (e.g. National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards).

20. A parliamentary paper is also provided that provides rationale for the clauses in the exposure draft.

Purpose and related provisions

21. The exposure draft proposes the purpose of the act as to enable:

· Te Oranga o te Taiao to be upheld, including by protecting and enhancing the natural environment

· people and communities to use the environment in a way that supports the wellbeing of present generations without compromising the wellbeing of future generations.

22. In this context, the concept Te Oranga o te Taiao is suggested to incorporate:

· the health of the natural environment

· the intrinsic relationship between iwi and hapū and te taiao

· the interconnectedness of all parts of the natural environment

· the essential relationship between the health of the natural environment and its capacity to sustain all life.

23. According to the support material, Te Oranga o te Taiao is intended to be connected to and supported within other NBA provisions that provide for the better alignment of the relationship management to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te ao Māori. This includes environmental outcomes and implementation principles.

24. Wellbeing is defined to encompass the four wellbeings and the environment is defined to include the natural environment as well as people and communities and the built environment they create.

25. The proposed purpose largely aligns with the council’s previous submission to the panel on the Transforming the resource management system: Opportunities for change paper.

Principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi

26. The exposure draft’s proposed principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi clause requires that any person exercising functions or powers under that act must give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This is stronger than the current RMA equivalent which requires the principles to be taken into account. The proposed clause reflects the council’s submission to the panel.

27. The supplementary information states that it is intended that the NBA would contain direction and guidance as to how this clause is to be implemented. This could be an area for feedback in the council’s submission.

Environmental limits

28. Environmental limits prescribe the minimum standards of the system to protect the ecological integrity of the natural environment and/or human health.

29. Limits (either in terms of a minimum state or the maximum allowable harm of stress permitted) are required for air; biodiversity, habitats, and ecosystems; coastal waters; estuaries; freshwater; and soil. These limits could be different for different locations or circumstances.

30. Limits can be either qualitative or quantitative and will be either prescribed through the NPF or through NBEPs.

31. The exposure draft’s clauses relating to environmental limits largely align with council’s previous submission in the matters it covered and the requirement for a precautionary approach.

Environmental Outcomes

32. These outcomes must be promoted by the National Planning Framework and all Natural and Built Environments Plans.

33. Given their importance in the new system the proposed outcomes in the draft exposure draft will be a key focus for council’s submission.

34. They cover outcomes related to:

· the quality of air, freshwater, coastal waters, estuaries and soils

· ecological integrity

· outstanding natural features and landscapes

· areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna

· access and character of the coast, lakes, rivers, wetlands and their margins

· the relationship of iwi and hapū, and their tikanga and traditions, with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga

· the mana and mauri of the natural environment

· cultural heritage, including cultural landscapes

· protected customary rights

· greenhouse gas emissions

· urban areas

· housing supply

· rural areas

· infrastructure services

· natural hazards and climate change.

35. These outcomes go further than the current RMA’s equivalent (matters of national importance and other matters), particularly by including the mana and mauri of the natural environment, cultural landscapes, climate change mitigation, urban areas and housing supply, rural areas, and provision of infrastructure services.

Key clauses for the National Planning Framework

36. The NPF will include and replace existing forms of national direction and combine their existing functions and powers. This approach was supported by council’s previous submission to the panel on the Transforming the resource management system: Opportunities for change paper.

37. Its purpose will be to provide integrated direction on matters of national significance or where consistency nationally or across parts of New Zealand would be desirable.

38. The NPF will:

· prescribe environmental limits or enable plans to do so

· set out provisions directing the following outcomes: the quality of air, freshwater, coastal waters, estuaries, and soils; ecological integrity; outstanding natural features and landscapes; areas of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna; greenhouse gas emissions; urban areas; housing supply; rural areas; infrastructure services; and natural hazards and climate change

· contain provisions to help resolve conflicts relating to the environment, including conflicts between or among any of the environmental outcomes.

39. In doing the above, it must include strategic goals such as the vision, direction and priorities for the integrated management of the environment within the environmental limits; and how the wellbeing of present and future generations is to be provided for within the relevant environmental limits.

40. The NPF may also include provisions on any other matter that accords with the purpose of the NPF.

41. The process for the preparation of the NPF is not provided in the exposure draft. The supporting material suggests that this could take several forms, such as a board of inquiry or independent panel with a simplified process for less significant matters, or there could be a standing independent body to maintain consistency and integration.

42. The support material states that the eventual process is intended to provide for:

· a role for iwi, hapū and Māori that gives effect to the principles of Te Tiriti

· effective and proportionate public consultation

· appropriate evidence and technical expertise including mātauranga Māori and independent advice

· opportunities for early engagement with decision-makers, including local government

· robust evaluation and analysis

· consideration of the precautionary approach, integrated management, cumulative effects and the purpose of the act.

43. The support material acknowledges the need for further work to determine the role for iwi, hapū and Māori in the process and substance of the NPF.

Implementation principles

44. The exposure draft contains placeholder language on the principles that people who are involved in the system must follow.

45. The current principles cover integrated management of the environment; kawa, kaitiakitanga, and mātauranga Māori; public participation; participation by iwi and hapū; authority and responsibility of each iwi and hapū to protect and sustain the health and wellbeing of te taiao; cumulative effects; and the precautionary approach.

Key clauses for the Natural and Built Environments Plans

46. Cabinet agreed that regulatory planning be conducted at a regional level through a single plan. This would see around 14 plans created nationally and would be similar in nature to the current Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) which combines the functions of regional and district plans. Plans would be subject to an independent hearings panel (IHP) process in line with the development of the AUP.

47. The exposure draft proposes that the purpose of plans would be to further the purpose of the act by providing a framework for the integrated management of the environment in the region that the plan relates to.

48. The supplementary information makes it clear that the government is still considering the best approach to plan preparation and decision-making. In the absence of a clear policy preference, the exposure draft adopts the panel’s approach of permanent bodies made up of one member from each local authority of the region, a number of mana whenua representatives, and one representative of the Minister of Conservation reflecting their interests in relation to the Coastal Marine Area.

49. The supplementary material sets out the following matters relating to committees where they are seeking specific feedback:

· size and scope of the committees (e.g. whether all councils are represented, whether the size of the committee varies by region, proportionality of membership between central and local government and mana whenua, and whether there is an optimal size for efficiency)

· local authority membership (e.g. whether there are elected members, experts or officials, and the selection method)

· mana whenua membership (e.g. selection method and the approach to representation)

· number of local authorities and mana whenua members (e.g. whether the same in all regions for all issues)

· how the planning committee secretariat will be funded (noting the panel’s recommended approach was for local authorities to fund the secretariat)

· legal status of planning committees.

50. The exposure draft is silent on who would chair these planning committees and method of appointment. The panel recommended that these committees would be fully autonomous meaning their decisions would not be subject to further approval from local authorities, with local authorities able to submit on the plans to the IHP.

51. There may be some matters for which local authorities would also carry out local planning for, although the exposure draft is not clear on these matters or the process for doing this.

System efficiencies

52. The support material includes a list of examples of how the system could be more efficient and less complex. The select committee is invited to add to this list and council could provide suggestions as part of its submission.

Further material

53. The exposure draft and support material can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/publications/natural-and-built-environments-bill-parliamentary-paper-on-the-exposure-draft/

54. Further information and summary documents on resource management system reform can be found here: https://environment.govt.nz/what-government-is-doing/areas-of-work/rma/resource-management-system-reform/

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

55. The proposed decisions this report seeks are procedural and do not have any direct impacts on climate change.

56. The panel’s report paper acknowledges addressing climate change challenges as being a key consideration in future-proofing our resource management system.

57. A reformed resource management system is expected to significantly impact Auckland Council’s roles and responsibilities as Auckland prepares for and is more adapted to the effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

58. Relevant council departments and council-controlled organisations have been identified and contributions will be sought from them in developing the council group’s response to the NBA exposure draft.

59. The potential impacts on the council group and activities will become clearer once the NBA, SPA, and CAA are introduced in bill form.

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

Local impacts and local board views

60. Local board views are being sought during the development of council’s submission and will be reported back to the Planning Committee. Local board resolutions received by 26 July 2021 will be included as part of council’s submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

61. The decisions this report seeks do not directly impact on Māori, however both the resource management system review and specific issues likely to be covered in the NBA exposure draft are likely to be of significant interest to and have a significant impact on Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

62. The submission can be developed within existing budget provision and as part of business as usual central government advocacy activity.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. No risks related to the local board input into this process have been identified.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. Local board resolutions on the NBA exposure draft will be included in the Auckland Council submission on this matter.

65. The NBA exposure draft is likely to be introduced in early July 2021 with an expected submission period of four weeks.

66. The SPA and NBA are likely to be introduced in December 2021 or early in 2022 and their progress through the house is likely to take around a year. This will include the usual opportunity to submit to the select committee.

67. The CAA will be introduced at some point in the first half of 2022 and will also involve a select committee submission opportunity.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Mark Macfarlane - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Helgard Wagener - Acting Policy and Planning Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 July 2021

Approval for a new pedestrian accessway name at 23 Murphys Park Drive, Flat Bush (Stage 5A)

File No.: CP2021/10008

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Howick Local Board to name a new pedestrian accessway, created by way of a subdivision development at 23 Murphys Park Drive, Flat Bush (Stage 5A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Raymond Wang of Murphys Park Development LP and the agent, Daisy Zhu of Mckenzie and Co. have proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

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

5. The proposed names for the new pedestrian accessway at 23 Murphys Park Drive (Stage 5A) are:

· Creekside Way (Applicant Preferred)

· Creekbank Way (first alternative)

· Green Creek Way (second alternative)

· Waimatomato Way (third alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) approve the name Creekside Way (applicant’s preferred name) for the new pedestrian accessway created by way of subdivision at 23 Murphys Park Drive, Flat Bush (Stage 5A), in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60303676 and SUB60303940).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN60303676 (subdivision reference number SUB60303940) was issued in December 2017 for the construction of 65 dwellings with associated earthworks, accessways and a new pedestrian walkway.

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

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

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

10. As per the advice from Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) and the council`s property data team, the two new COALs in this stage of the development do not require names.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

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

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

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

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

13. The proposed names have been chosen by the applicant and agent to continue the theme of the surrounding natural environment and shows consistency with the previous stages of the development:

Table One: Proposed names and their meanings

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Creekside Way (applicant preferred)	Creekside continues the theme of the surrounding natural environment; creeks, streams, parks, reserves, which has been used for naming of other roads within the development (e.g. Streamside Drive, Murphys Park Drive, Treeline Lane, Picturesque Drive). Creekside Way has been chosen as it is across from Picturesque Drive, to the West of Stage 5A, is an existing creek that has been maintained throughout the development, and therefore the development is ‘creekside’. This name pays homage to the surrounding natural environment.
Creekbank Way (first alternative)	Creekbank continues the theme of the surrounding natural environment; creeks, streams, parks, reserves, which has inspired the naming of other roads within the development (e.g. Streamside Drive, Murphys Park Drive, Treeline Lane, Picturesque Drive). Creekbank Lane has been chosen as it is across from Picturesque Drive, to the West of Stage 5A, is an existing creek that has been maintained throughout the development, and therefore the development is on the ‘creekbank’. This name pays homage to the surrounding natural environment.
Green Creek Way (second alternative)	Green Creek continues the theme of the surrounding natural environment; creeks, streams, parks, reserves, which has inspired the naming of other roads within the development (e.g. Streamside Drive, Murphys Park Drive, Treeline Lane, Picturesque Drive). Green Creek has been chosen as it is across from Picturesque Drive, to the West of Stage 5A, is an existing creek that has been maintained throughout the development. This creek has lush green plants around it and therefore the creek is described as clean and ‘green’. This name pays homage to the surrounding natural environment.
Waimatomato Way (third alternative)	“Waimatomato” also stands for Green Creek Way in Māori. Name suggested by Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust.

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

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

16. ‘Way’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the new pedestrian accessway.

17. Land Information New Zealand and mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the Guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

22. On 13 April 2021 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

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

· Ngāti Maru (Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

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

· Ngāti Whanaunga (Ngāti Whanaunga Incorporated)

· Te Ahiwaru – Waiohua (Makaurau Marae Māori Trust)

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Patukirikiri (Te Patukirikiri Incorporated)

· Waikato – Tainui (Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated)

· Ngāti Tamaoho

· Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara (Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust)

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei Trust)

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

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua.

23. By the close of the consultation period, responses were only received from Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust and Waikato-Tainui.

24. Waikato-Tainui supports the mana whenua of the area to take lead role and recommended the developer to engage with them.

25. Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust has recommended two Maori names to represent the Maori history to the area. “Waimatomato” has been chosen by the applicant as one of the alternative names. “Aramanga” has also been considered by the applicant, however LINZ has confirmed that due to a similar sounding name within one km of the site, the name “Aramanga” is not suitable for the location.

26. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua. Due to the extent of feedback received and the scale of the development, it is considered that mana whenua consultation has been satisfactorily undertaken in this instance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Location map	37
b ⇩	Site Plan	39

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 July 2021

Urgent Decision for Howick Local Board – reallocating funds from the 2020/2021 Arts, Community and Events work programme, specifically the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity line

File No.: CP2021/09973

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To note that an urgent decision was made to reallocate funds from the 2020/2021 Arts, Community and Events work programme, specifically the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity line.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its meeting on 9 December 2019 the Howick Local Board resolved (HW/2019/159) the following in relation to urgent decision-making:

That the Howick Local Board:

a) adopt the urgent decision-making process for matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and meet the requirement of a quorum;

b) delegate authority to the chair and deputy chair, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board;

c) agree that the relationship manager, chair and deputy chair (or any person/s acting in these roles) will authorise the urgent decision-making process by signing off the authorisation memo;

d) note that all urgent decisions will be reported to the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

3. An urgent decision was required in this instance because the local board expressed interest at its workshop on 24 June 2021 to reallocate funds from the 2021/2021 Arts, Community and Events work programme, specifically the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity line (community grants) to limit any underspend for the current financial year. A formal request to the Governing Body made at its 17 June 2021 meeting to carry over any underspend was declined by the Chair; therefore, reallocation of any underspend has been workshopped with the Board and a decision is required before the end of the financial year on 30 June 2021. The Board’s next scheduled meeting is Monday, 19 July 2021.

4. An urgent decision was required because the matter could not be delayed until a subsequent local board meeting due to the decision needing to be made prior to the financial year end on 30 June 2021.

5. On 29 June 2021 the chair and deputy chair made an urgent decision on behalf of the Board to reallocate funds from the 2020/2021 Arts, Community and Events work programme, specifically the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity line.The urgent decision is included in this report as Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) note the urgent decision made on 29 June 2021 to reallocate funds from the 2020/2021 Arts, Community and Events work programme, specifically the ‘Community Grants Howick’ activity line.

b) note the decision provided as follows:

i) agree to further fund each application in the Howick Local Grants Round Three 2020/2021 listed in the following table:

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount further funded
LG2107-301	Botany Downs Secondary College	Arts and culture	Towards professional tutor and supervision fees to develop and deliver kapa haka workshops for college students	$1500.00
LG2107-308	Botany Chinese Association Incorporated	Community	Towards venue hire, tai chi coaching, audio speaker purchase and festival performance fees promoting community residents’ fitness and entertainment activities	$2000.00
LG2107-309	New Zealand Love Dance Association Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards studio hire, choreography, promotions and administration fees.	$1000.00
LG2107-311	Botany Downs Primary School Board of Trustees	Arts and culture	Towards the purchase of replacement Kapa Haka uniforms	$4950.00
LG2107-314	Life Education Trust Counties Manukau	Community	Towards the delivery of the applicant's health and well-being programme covering running costs of the mobile classrooms including educational resources, insurances and teachers' salaries	$12,694.00
LG2107-325	Howick Tourism Incorporated trading as East Auckland Tourism	Community	Towards six month maintenance of search engine optimisation and Google Ads activity and updated East Auckland Tourism Website	$2000.00
LG2107-343	CrossNet Incorporated	Community	Towards development and provision of online toolkit, customised school portal and online communications to support the youth resilience programme known as eXTEND	$3000.00
LG2107-346	Uxbridge Community Projects Incorporated	Arts and culture	Towards purchase of additional six flip-top tables to facilitate community meeting spaces	$1744.00
LG2107-348	Pakuranga Athletic Club Incorporated	Sport and recreation	Towards the purchase of a large gazebo	$1540.00
LG2107-350	Bhartiya Samaj Charitable Trust	Community	Towards operational expenses of elder support program including transport costs, venue hire, celebrations and recreation	$2647.00
LG2107-351	Pakuranga-Rahihi Playcentre	Community	Towards purchase of “child height” junk play tables, carpentry table, hot glue guns, tools and consumables	$2000.00
LG2107-353	Dance Therapy NZ	Arts and culture	Towards the delivery of “STARS Pakuranga” workshops between July and December 2021, including venue hire, facilitation, coordination, supervision, client support and liaison, equipment and administration costs	$5000.00
MB2021-211	Auckland Events Company Limited	Events	Towards the logistic costs to deliver Food Truck Series event at various locations between September 2021 and April 2022	$636.00
MB2021-246	Age Concern Auckland Incorporated	Community	Towards salary costs, office overheads, room and equipment hire, meeting and catering, and volunteer expenses	$4000.00
MB2021-253	KidsCan Charitable Trust	Community	Towards programme items food, raincoats, shoes and socks for children attending KidsCan low decile partner schools within the Auckland region	$3000.00
Total				$47,771.00

ii) allocate up to $157,000 from the Board’s unspent 2020/2021 Community Grants budget (work programme ID 732) as detailed in the table below:

2020/2021 work programme ID	Activity Name	Allocation
701	Operational grant to Howick Children's and Youth Theatre	$16,000.00
702	Operational grant to Howick Historical Village	$38,000.00
703	Operational grant to Howick Little Theatre	$15,000.00
704	Operational grant to Uxbridge Arts and Culture	$30,000.00
705	Operational grant to Manukau Concert Band	$5000.00
706	Operational grant to Howick Brass	$7000.00
707	Operational grant to City of Manukau Pipes and Drums	$6000.00
712	Māori Engagement: Improving responsiveness to local Māori Howick	$20,000.00
1929	Howick Volunteer Coastguard Incorporated	$20,000.00
Total		$157,000.00

A) request that the additional allocation of $20,000 to Howick Local Board work programme ID 712, Māori Engagement: Improving responsiveness to local Māori Howick, be utilised for works and programmes related to Te Whare O Matariki.

iii) grant $8700.00 from the unspent 2020/2021 Community Grants budget to the Pakuranga Tennis Club for their annual rent.

iv) allocate up to $30,000 from the Board’s unspent 2020/2021 Community Grants budget (work programme ID 732) to the Mayoral Relief Fund to support residents affected by the tornado that occurred in Papatoetoe on 19 June 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent decision	45

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Vanessa Phillips - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Governance forward work calendar	55

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Workshop record 3 June 2021	59
b ⇩	Workshop record 10 June 2021	61
c ⇩	Workshop record 17 June 2021	63
d ⇩	Workshop record 24 June 2021	65

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

[3] Local board representatives were Margi Watson (Albert-Eden Local Board) and Mike Turinsky (Howick Local Board)

[4] Suggestions included: retaining the current size of signs advertising commercial sexual services in non-residential areas as there is insufficient evidence to justify a change; requiring council event signs to meet the Bylaw’s standards; clarifying requirements for landowner approval and the definition of community event; clarifying how election signs are regulated between parliamentary and local elections, and within and outside of the election period..

Chairperson	Adele White
Deputy Chairperson	John Spiller
Members	Katrina Bungard
	Bo Burns
	David Collings
	Bruce Kendall
	Mike Turinsky
	Bob Wichman
	Peter Young, JP