Agenda of Papakura Local Board - Wednesday, 28 July 2021

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

ITEM TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 Welcome 5

2 Apologies 5

3 Declaration of Interest 5

4 Confirmation of Minutes 5

5 Leave of Absence 5

6 Acknowledgements 5

7 Petitions 5

8 Deputations 5

8.1 Deputation - Reading Warrior 5

8.2 Deputation - Fix Up, Look Sharp 6

8.3 Deputation - CommUnity 6

9 Public Forum 6

10 Extraordinary Business 7

11 Governing Body Member's Update 9

12 Chairperson's Update 11

13 Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022 13

14 Auckland Transport Monthly Report - July 2021 33

15 Draft proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw 37

16 26-32 O'Shannessey Street, Papakura and 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura disposal recommendation 43

17 Approval for renaming two new public roads at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura. 53

18 Adoption of the Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021 63

19 Papakura Youth Scholarships 2021-2022 - Criteria Change Confirmation 69

20 For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board 73

21 Papakura Local Board Achievements Register 2019-2022 Political Term 87

22 Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - July 2021 105

23 Papakura Local Board Workshop Records 113

24 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

1 Welcome

A board member will lead the meeting in a prayer.

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 23 June 2021, as true and correct.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

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

8.1 Deputation - Reading Warrior

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. David Riley from Reading Warrior will speak to the board about the project.

2. The Reading Warrior project seeks to get young people reading, to inspire them with positive and inspirational stories from New Zealand and the Pacific, and to encourage them to write their own stories.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) thank David Riley for his presentation and attendance.

Attachments

a Deputation - Reading Warrior - David Riley - Papakura Local Board............ 131

8.2 Deputation - Fix Up, Look Sharp

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Jane Treseder from Fix Up, Look Sharp, will speak to the board about the services they offer.

2. Fix Up Look Sharp is a not-for-profit charity that supports job seekers with a personal styling experience assisting in readiness for job interview and employment.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) thank Jane Treseder for her presentation and attendance.

Attachments

a 28 July 2021 - Papakura Local Board - Deputation, Fix Up, Look Sharp presentation....................................... 149

8.3 Deputation - CommUnity

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Paul Devening from CommUnity will speak to the board about the organisation.

2. CommUnity is a fund-generating programme that involves community groups, businesses and shoppers.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) thank Paul Devening for his presentation and attendance.

Attachments

a 28 July 2021 - Papakura Local Board - CommUnity Deputation presentation. 177

9 Public Forum

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

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

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022

File No.: CP2021/09995

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For the local board to adopt its Joint Council-Controlled Organisations (CCO) Engagement Plan 2021-2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The review panel for the independent review of Auckland Council’s substantive council-controlled organisations presented its findings to the Governing Body and local board chairs in August 2020. All 64 recommendations were adopted.

3. Recommendations 6, 34, and 53 were designated as those that CCOs would work with local boards to implement. Recommendation 34 (b) of the 2020 CCO Review advised the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board.

4. A template for the joint engagement plan has been developed in conjunction with local board members and CCO staff over the last six months. While it will be signed, it will be a live document that will be updated as required.

5. Workshops have been held at all 21 local boards with CCO staff. Local boards have provided their views on CCO delivery and engagement in their area, and the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme, both for the local board and for the community.

6. These discussions have formed the basis of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 that is provided as Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) adopt the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 as agreed between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku Development Auckland, and Watercare.

b) note that the Joint Engagement Plan is a live document that will be updated as needed, with changes reported to the local board each quarter.

c) authorise the chair of the local board to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, in conjunction with representatives from the four CCOs.

Horopaki

Context

7. In November 2019, the Governing Body approved the draft terms of reference for an independent review of Auckland Council’s substantive council-controlled organisations (CCOs) (GB/2019/127).

8. These terms of reference required the independent review panel to consider whether CCOs were an efficient and effective model for delivering services, and whether the CCO decision-making model had enough political oversight, public transparency and accountability.

CCO Review Findings

9. The independent panel presented the findings of the CCO Review to the Governing Body and local board chairs on 11 August 2020.

10. The review made 64 recommendations noting that the recommendations should be considered as a package. On 27 August 2020, the Governing Body resolved to agree in principle all of the review’s recommendations (GB/2020/89).

11. Local boards provided input to the CCO Review by:

· participating in the CCO Review process

· providing feedback on the final report to the Governing Body in August 2020.

12. The 64 recommendations were divided up into categories of work:

· those to be implemented by the council’s chief executive

· those the council’s chief executive would work with CCO chief executive(s) to implement

· those that the Panuku Development Auckland board would consider and report back on

· those that CCOs would work with local boards to implement; this last group includes recommendations 6, 34, and 53.

13. Recommendation 34 was that CCOs and local boards reset how they engage with one another, by means of:

a) a workshop to develop a more meaningful way for CCOs and local boards to work together

b) the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board

c) more initiative by local boards in integrating their own planning with CCO planning

d) liaison between CCOs and local boards at a more senior level so CCOs can quickly remedy local board concerns

e) the preparation of joint CCO six-monthly reports for each local board

f) the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area.

14. This report focusses on activities undertaken to deliver part (b) of recommendation 34, the preparation of a joint CCO engagement plan for each local board.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Developing a joint CCO engagement plan template

15. Prior to the 2020 CCO Review, the Governance Manual for substantive council-controlled organisations set the expectation that each CCO would prepare a local board engagement plan every three years, by 31 July following local board elections, and report to local boards accordingly. These engagement plans were created separately by the five CCOs, and were generic across all 21 local boards.

16. Recommendation 34 (b) of the 2020 CCO Review advised the preparation of joint CCO engagement plans for each local board.

17. A template for the joint engagement plan has been developed iteratively over the last six months, with input from Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Panuku Development Auckland, and Watercare staff.

18. The template includes:

· CCO responsibilities

· local board commitments

· local board plan outcomes and objectives

· names of local board members and staff from the CCOs and local board services

· leads and/or delegations in place

· an overview of the IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum that is used to indicate the degree of engagement in each project

· work programme tables for each CCO.

19. The sections on CCO responsibilities and local board commitments have largely been imported from previous engagement plans, or directly from the Governance Manual.

20. Local board plan outcomes and objectives have been included to ensure these are front and centre when CCOs are working with local boards.

21. While directly addressing recommendation 34(a), the joint engagement plan also addresses other elements of recommendation 34 as follows:

· documents key contacts, including senior CCO representatives of the organisation well placed to quickly respond to and resolve local concerns (34d)

· gives local boards the opportunity to highlight projects likely to be most significant to them as governors, and contributes to a “no surprises” environment

· the process of developing, agreeing and documenting levels of engagement for each project or programme is the first step towards ensuring the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area (34f).

22. This template was shared with local boards for feedback via the Chairs’ Forum (December 2020 and May 2021) and via a memo in May 2021.

23. It will be used for the 2021 financial year, with feedback from this 2021 process taken into account and any necessary changes incorporated for future years.

A workshop to develop a more meaningful way for CCOs and local boards to work together

24. In delivering parts (a) and (b) of recommendation 34, staff have linked the two outcomes together and supported local boards and CCOs to customise the content of each local board’s engagement plan via a joint workshop.

25. Staff from the four CCOs have attended joint workshops facilitated by Local Board Services at each of the 21 local boards between May and July 2021.

26. These workshops have provided local boards with the opportunity to share their views on CCO delivery and engagement in their area. They included an outline of each CCO’s work programme relating to the local area, and local boards have provided their views on the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme.

27. The local board also indicated their preference for whether and how community engagement is undertaken for each project.

Customised engagement plans

28. The discussions that took place at the joint workshops are reflected in the customised version of the engagement plan provided for this local board as Attachment A.

29. This plan represents a point in time, and will be subject to change over the course of the year. It is a “live document” that will be updated when needed. Major changes to the CCO work programme, or to the agreed level of local board and public engagement, will be workshopped with the local board ahead of any change. Minor changes will be summarised and reported on each quarter.

30. Work programme items that will be confirmed with the formal adoption of the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 (LTP) will be included as they become available. This includes items from the Economic Development Action Plan, and the Regional Land Transport Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The adoption of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have a direct impact on climate.

32. Each CCO must work within Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework and information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

33. Adopting the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 is likely to have a positive impact on other parts of the council as well as between the respective CCOs within each local board area.

34. These plans will be shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes, and will give council staff greater visibility of CCO work programmes.

35. To avoid or reduce disruption, staff will align the processes for the local board work programme and the updating of the CCO engagement plans over time.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. Local board engagement plans will enable local boards to customise engagement between CCOs and communities in their areas, by signalling those issues and projects which are of most significance within their communtiies.

37. Local boards provided input to the CCO Review by:

· participating in the CCO Review process

· providing feedback on the final report to the Governing Body in August 2020.

38. Local boards have been kept up to date on the development of the engagement plan template via:

· input and feedback at December 2020 Chairs’ Forum

· update at May 2021 Chairs’ Forum

· a memo to all local board members in May 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

39. Adopting the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 is likely to have a positive impact on local engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka.

40. While both CCOs and local boards have engagement programmes with Māori, the engagement plan will allow a more cohesive and coordinated approach to engagement, with more advance planning of how different parts of the community will be involved.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. The adoption of the Joint Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. It is likely that there will be changes made to work programme items in the engagement plan during the year, or to the level of engagement that the board or the community will have. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the document states clearly that it is subject to change, contains a table recording changes made since it was signed, and will be re-published on the local board agenda quarterly, to ensure public transparency.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43. With the engagement plans completed for all 21 local boards, staff will develop a reporting framework that best responds to the type of projects and the level of engagement to which local boards and CCOs have agreed.

44. CCOs will work with local boards to ensure that any major changes to the work programme or to engagement levels are workshopped with the board, and well documented.

45. Minor changes will be noted within the live document and shared with the local board each quarter.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Papakura Local Board Joint CCO Enagagement Plan 2021-2022	19

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead, Senior Advisor Operations and Planning, Local Board Services

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Auckland Transport Monthly Report - July 2021

File No.: CP2021/10459

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Papakura Local Board on 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

· Local Board Capital Fund

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

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

3. That the Papakura Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport July 2021 report.

Horopaki

Context

4. AT is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports on a monthly basis to local boards, as set out in the 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

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

Regional Land Transport Plan

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

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Key projects in the RLTP for the Papakura Board are the Level Crossing/Grade separation and Papakura Park and Ride projects.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

12. Through Auckland Council’s Long-term Plan 2021-2031 and Auckland Transport’s 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.

13. Papakura Local Board’s allocation is $ $716,890 for the 2021/2022 financial year, with the same amount for the 2022/2023 financial year. The local board will hold an initial workshop on 28 July 2021 to prioritise potential projects for these funds.

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

School Speed Trial

15. 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. 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.

Brylee Drive

16. As part of resource consent conditions for the neighbouring Waiata Shores development, a link road connection has recently been built joining Brylee Drive to Gosper Road in Waiata Shores. The consent also requires AT to implement traffic calming measures on Brylee Drive before this road is opened.

17. An public initial feedback round toward the end of the 2020 year led to a proposed series of raised tables on Brylee Drive. AT agreed to hold a further engagement round.

18. During 11 May 2021 - 4 June 2021, 37 responses were submitted from the public; during in person drop-in sessions, online and via post. The majority of respondents told us that the proposed speed hump locations were appropriate and that the pedestrian crossing will improve safety. The feedback summary will be circulated to the board and submitters on the week beginning 12 July 2021.

Ride Share Trial – Takanini and Conifer Grove.

19. The Service Network Development team of AT are geared up to launch AT Local in Conifer Grove, Takaanini and Papakura. AT will publish a media release on 16 August 2021 announcing the new service. Beta-testing will take place from 23 August 2021 (a soft-launch with a very limited number of users to test the service). AT Local for this service will become fully operational from 29 August 2021.

20. A workshop with the board on 21 July 2021 will cover:

· final service design

· communications strategy – seeking assistance with promoting the service to the community

· beta-testing participant recruitment (if required).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. AT engages closely with 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.

22. AT’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.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. 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

25. The purpose of this report is to inform the Local Board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. There are no impacts specific to Māori for this reporting period. AT 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.

27. Our 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.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. AT will continue to update the local 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 Partner

Authorisers

Ioane Afoa – Head of Community Engagement South

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Draft proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw

File No.: CP2021/09857

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 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).

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:

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:

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 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 ⇨	Attachment 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

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

26-32 O'Shannessey Street, Papakura and 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura disposal recommendation

File No.: CP2021/08538

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. This report seeks endorsement from the Papakura Local Board for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Papakura and 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura to be recommended to council’s Finance and Performance Committee for disposal.

2. The report notes that Eke Panuku has agreed to seek urban renewal and housing outcomes for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent under its ‘Support’ development category, which will support the revitalisation of the town centre, subject to the board’s endorsement for the proposed disposal of both sites.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Papakura and 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura are off-street car parks no longer required for transport service purposes. The rationalisation process for the sites commenced in August 2015 and November 2017 respectively. Consultation with council departments and council-controlled organisations (CCOs), iwi authorities and the Papakura Local Board was undertaken in 2018 and was revisited in 2021.

4. Although the Papakura Local Board did not endorse the proposed disposals in 2018, the sites were recommended for disposal to council’s Finance and Performance Committee in October 2018. The committee’s decision was that a disposal be deferred for up to three years to inform strategic planning and a Papakura car parking review.

5. In 2021 following further discussions with the Papakura Local Board, Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku) has agreed to again recommend the sites for disposal to the Finance and Performance Committee subject to the board’s endorsement. If approved for disposal, Eke Panuku will seek urban renewal and housing outcomes under its ‘Support’ development category which will support the revitalisation of the Papakura town centre.

6. The parcels that make up 36 Coles Crescent are subject to the Reserves Act 1977. Council’s Finance and Performance Committee previously approved the commencement of the reserve revocation process in 2018. The reserve status of the land needs to be revoked prior to a proposed disposal occurring. Final revocation of the reserve status is subject to completing the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and Local Government Act 2002, including public advertising.

7. A resolution approving the disposal of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent is required from the Finance and Performance Committee before the proposed divestments can be progressed. Sales proceeds from disposal of the subject sites will be allocated towards the asset recycling target contained in Auckland Council’s Recovery Budget and Long-Term Plan 2021-31.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) endorse the disposal of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Papakura and 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura.

b) note that the Finance Performance Committee has approved the commencement of the reserve revocation process for 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura.

Horopaki

Context

8. Asset recycling is an important lever for Auckland Council, providing capital to be invested into the most strategically important activities. The council’s Recovery Budget includes $70 million to be realised from asset recycling in the 2021/2022 financial year. This is to be comprised of proceeds of sale from surplus council owned property and alternative commercial arrangements.

9. In accordance with its statement of intent, Eke Panuku is required to undertake an ongoing review of council’s property assets. This includes identifying properties from within council’s portfolio that are no longer required for public work purposes and may be suitable for sale and development.

10. For all properties that are potentially no longer being required for public work purposes, Eke Panuku engages with council departments and its CCOs through an expression of interest process to establish whether the property must be retained for a strategic purpose or is required for a future funded public work. Once a property has been internally cleared of any public work requirements, Eke Panuku then consults with local boards, mana whenua and ward councilors.

11. The Finance and Performance Committee makes the final decision to approve a property for disposal.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Property information - 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Papakura

12. 26-32 O’Shannessey Street is a 809m² council owned site that was acquired by the former Papakura City Council in 1983 for parking purposes. The site is subject to a right of way obligation providing access to the adjoining property at 22 O’Shannessey Street.

13. 26-32 O’Shannessey Street was managed by Auckland Transport (AT) as part of its car parking network. In 2015, the AT Board resolved that it was no longer required for AT’s infrastructure purposes. 26-32 O’Shannessey Street was subsequently transferred from AT to council for rationalisation purposes.

14. The Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) zoning is Metropolitan Centre. The site has a council rating valuation of $580,000.

Property information – 36 Coles Crescent, Papakura

15. 36 Coles Crescent is a 3,586m² site that comprises of five separate parcels that are local purpose (parking) reserves, and two that are local purpose (service lane) reserves subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

16. The seven parcels were acquired by the former Papakura Borough Council and former Papakura District Council between 1953 and 1983 for parking and service lane purposes.

17. Another service lane reserve adjoins the northern boundary of the site. That 97m² site is not recommended for disposal. Access to this service lane area will be maintained by easements should 36 Coles Crescent be approved for disposal.

18. Following an enquiry from a member of the public seeking to purchase the site, a review established there is no requirement to use the site for transport purposes. Eke Panuku subsequently commenced the rationalisation process in 2017.

19. The AUP zoning of 36 Coles Crescent and the adjoining service lane is Metropolitan Centre. The combined parcels have a council rating valuation of $1.7 million.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The proposed sale of these two sites as ‘Support’ development category locations is likely to lead to land use changes. It is acknowledged that any form of construction and development can increase carbon emissions.

21. Emissions associated with any potential redevelopment can be reduced through development standards agreed through future development agreements, application of Panuku’s Homestar 6 policy and requirements to reduce carbon emissions in commercial developments.

22. 36 Coles Crescent is located within a flood prone area. Should the site be approved for disposal, Eke Panuku will inform potential purchasers of the potential flooding risk.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23. The internal consultation with all council business units and CCOs for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent commenced in 2015 and 2017 respectively. No alternative service uses were identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24. Panuku first engaged with the Papakura Local Board regarding 26-32 O’Shannessey Street in 2015. The board provided consistent informal advice through the engagement that it was opposed to the proposed disposal of the site. The board sought clarification on the process to release the site from a transport service use and requested the site also be considered as part of local area planning.

25. Eke Panuku liaised with AT and council staff and responded to the board concerns, confirming AT’s assessment process was in accordance with its 2015 Parking strategy, that the local area planning did not include properties on a site-by-site basis, and that the planning work underway does not preclude a sale.

26. Subsequent engagement saw the board formally resolve opposing the proposed disposal of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street in September 2017, on the basis of the site’s importance within the Papakura Town Centre. The board further resolved that any subsequent disposal be subject to appropriate planning and design controls / covenants, that feedback from the Papakura Commercial Project Group be considered as part of the decision-making process, and that the site be considered within Eke Panuku’s optimisation or reinvestment policy framework.

27. In response Eke Panuku advised the board that 26-32 O’Shannessey Street does not meet the service property optimisation criteria as it does not provide a current council service. The site does not meet the reinvestment policy framework criteria as the Papakura town centre is not an Eke Panuku ‘Transform’ or ‘Unlock’ development location.

28. At workshops held in May 2018 and October 2018, the board was informed of the potential to enter into a development agreement with a member of the public to achieve a mixed-use development with housing outcomes, however, the development would not include public parking.

29. In response to concerns raised by the board regarding the proposed disposal of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street, Eke Panuku agreed to explore potential development options for 36 Coles Crescent in conjunction with the development investigations at 26-32 O’Shannessey Street. This would potentially align with the outcomes of the planning work recently completed by the Papakura Commercial Group on behalf of the board.

30. At workshops held in May and October 2018, Eke Panuku staff informed the board of a potential opportunity to enter into a development agreement with a member of the public to deliver a residential development on the 36 Coles Crescent site while maintaining the existing access way and informal parking arrangements.

31. The board resolved at its 18 October 2018 business meeting to oppose a disposal of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent on the basis that it wished to retain the sites to allow further strategic planning work, for an operational parking review to be undertaken, to allow a council political working party review of the role of local boards in the property disposal process, and that the local board chair address council’s Finance and Performance Committee opposing the disposal.

32. In October 2018 following a presentation from the Papakura Local Board, council’s Finance and Performance Committee resolved to retain both sites for up to three years to inform strategic planning and a car parking review. The committee also approved to revoke the reserve status for 36 Coles Crescent.

33. Eke Panuku subsequently ceased all work on the proposed disposal and ceased progressing potential development outcomes for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent.

34. Following discussions in May 2021 and at the request of the board, Eke Panuku has agreed to seek urban renewal and housing outcomes for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent under its ‘Support’ development category, which will support the revitalisation of the town centre, subject to the board’s endorsement for the proposed disposal of both sites.

35. This report provides the board with an opportunity to formalise its updated views regarding both the sites.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. Mana whenua iwi authorities were contacted for feedback on the proposed sale of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent in 2015 and 2017 respectively. The engagement sought to understand if there were any issues of cultural significance with the proposed disposals or to notify Eke Panuku of any commercial interest in the subject sites should they be approved for sale.

37. In 2017 Ngāti Tamaoho advised that both 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent are located in an area of high cultural significance to Ngāti Tamaoho, who occupied the Papakura area for centuries. It is currently the single location with the highest population of those who identify with Tamaoho. This information was considered in both the board and council’s Finance and Performance Committee in 2018 as part of the decision-making process.

38. Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāi Tai ki Tamaki and Te Akitai Waiohua previously registered commercial interests for 26-32 O’Shannessey Street. If the site is approved for disposal, Eke Panuku will follow up with those entities regarding potential commercial opportunities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. Capital receipts from the sale of properties not required by Auckland Council contribute to the Recovery and 10-year Budgets (2021-2031) by providing the Council with an efficient use of capital and prioritisation of funds to achieve its activities and projects.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. The access to adjacent properties provided by the existing service lane reserve adjacent to 36 Coles Crescent will need to be protected in any future development by easements registered on titles should the reserve status be revoked.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. Subject to receipt of the local board’s resolution for 36 Coles Crescent, Eke Panuku will undertake public notification of the proposed reserve revocation and undertake consultation with council departments, CCOs, mana whenua iwi authorities and the board regarding the proposed reserve revocation.

42. Following the successful completion of the proposed reserve revocation process for 36 Coles Crescent, Eke Panuku will report to the Finance and Performance Committee seeking approval to dispose of 26-32 O’Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent.

Author

Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor, Portfolio Review, Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Matt Casey – Team Leader Portfolio Review, Eke Panuku Development Auckland

Letitia Edwards - Head of Strategic Asset Optimisation, Eke Panuku Development Auckland

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Images of 26-32 O'Shannessey Street and 36 Coles Crescent	49

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Anthony Lewis - Senior Advisor, Portfolio Review, Panuku Development Auckland

Authorisers

Letitia Edwards - Head of Strategic Asset Optimisation (Acting)

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Approval for renaming two new public roads at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura.

File No.: CP2021/09939

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Papakura Local Board to rename two new public roads, created by way of a subdivision development at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura. The two names ‘Taiaha Street’ (for ROAD 2) and ‘Fredrick Hanson Road’ (for ROAD 4) were previously approved under resolution PPK/2021/80.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On the 26 May 2021, the Papakura Local Board approved the names ‘Taiaha Street’ for ROAD 2 and ‘Fredrick Hanson Road’ for ROAD 4 (resolution: PPK/2021/80). Both roads were proposed as extensions to existing roads, where the existing names would extend onto the newly created section of roads. LINZ and Council’s Property Data team have since advised that due to the lack of remaining street numbers left to allocate along both new sections of road, ROAD 2 and the top section of ROAD 4 will require separate names.

3. These changes would require the recission of resolution PPK/2021/80 so that two new names can be approved for the roads. No properties would be affected by this change as no dwellings have been constructed on ROAD 2 and ROAD 4 yet, however new addresses will need to be allocated for service provision.

4. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for road names. The Guidelines state that the renaming of roads is strongly discouraged unless there are compelling issues or reasons to support a change, including redesigns of roads, changes in traffic flow, mail or service delivery issues, or addressing issues. The addressing issues for ROAD 2 and the top section of ROAD 4 meet the criteria for renaming the roads.

5. Rather than finding new names for the new roads, the applicant, Maven Associates Limited, proposes to resubmit the names not used in the previous 104-114 Cosgrave Road report submitted to the Papakura Local Board (File No.: CP2021/06432). These names, some of which were suggested by Ngāti Pāoa, are still available for use and are presented below for consideration by the Local Board.

6. 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.

7. The proposed names for the two public roads at 104-114 Cosgrave Road are:

Applicant preferred names:

· ROAD 2: Hōia Street

· ROAD 4 (top section): Heihei Street

Pool of Alternative Names to be used for either public roads:

· Kahika Tū Street

· Te Ika a Whiro Street

· Hoera Wharepunga Street (Name suggested by Ngāti Pāoa)

· Haora Tipa Street (Name suggested by Ngāti Pāoa)

· Te Paepaetahi Street (Name suggested by Ngāti Pāoa).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) rescind resolution PPK/2021/80 to name the public road (ROAD 2) ‘Taiaha Street’ for the new extension (Road 2 being the continuation of the existing Taiaha Street) created by way of subdivision at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60358031 and SUB60358035). This name can no longer be used here as there are not enough street numbers to allocate if the road name is continued.

b) partially rescind resolution PPK/2021/80) in relation to resolution g) which named the top section of the public road ‘Fredrick Hanson Road’ for the new extension (Road 4 being the continuation of the existing Fredrick Hanson Road) created by way of subdivision at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60358031 and SUB60358035). This name can no longer be used here as there are not enough street numbers to allocate if the road name is continued.

c) approves the name Hōia Street (applicant’s preferred name) for the new public ROAD 2 at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60358031 and SUB60358035).

d) approves the name Heihei Street (applicant’s preferred name) for the top section of the new public ROAD 4 at 104-114 Cosgrave Road, Papakura, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60358031 and SUB60358035).

Horopaki

Context

8. A site plan showing the proposed street numbers allocated by Council’s Property Data team can be found in Attachment A, and the location plan of the development can be found in Attachment B.

9. On the 26 May 2021, the Papakura Local Board approved the names ‘Taiaha Street’ for ROAD 2 and ‘Fredrick Hanson Road’ for ROAD 4 (resolution: PPK/2021/80). Both roads were proposed as extensions to existing roads, where the existing names would extend onto the newly created section of roads.

10. InJune 2021, LINZ and Council’s Property Data team notified the Subdivision team that due to the existing addresses allocated along the existing roads, there were not enough new street numbers left to continue addressing along ROAD 2 and the top section of ROAD 4. It was advised that the two roads would require new names to enable street numbers to be allocated along the new roads.

11. As consultation with mana whenua was already done as part of the previous report, additional consultation is not considered necessary.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. 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.

13. 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.

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

Road number

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

ROAD 2

Hōia Street

(Applicant preferred)

Translate to “Military” in English. Name derived from the military connection to the area.

Top section of ROAD 4

Heihei Street

(Applicant preferred)

Maori word meaning: (noun) hen, chook, fowl, chicken. In reference to the farm animals living in the area.

15. The Applicant has also provided a pool of names that can be use as alternatives at 104-114 Cosgrave Road:

Pool of alternatives	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Kahika Tū Street	Paying homage to chiefs or leaders.
Te Ika a Whiro Street	An experienced warrior or war veteran. Speaks to the many not the few.

16. Additional names suggested by Ngāti Pāoa from the previous road naming report can also be used as alternatives at 104-114 Cosgrave Road:

Pool of alternatives	Meaning (as described by Ngāti Pāoa)
Hoera Wharepunga Street	A major Ngāti Pāoa chief recognised by a Government report from 1862 for retaining their loyalty to the Crown.
Haora Tipa Street	A major Ngāti Pāoa chief recognised by a Government report from 1862 for retaining their loyalty to the Crown.
Te Paepaetahi Street	A ridge near the Wairoa river where there is a look-out place (okiokinga) still known as Te Paepaetahi, whence can be seen the waters of the Papakura creek Pāhurihuri or better known as Pāhurehure.

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

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

19. Road Type: All road types are acceptable, suiting the form and layout of each public road.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

24. All mana whenua were consulted as part of the previous road naming report, with Ngāti Pāoa suggesting five additional names: two names were duplicates to names already being used in the Auckland region and therefore not acceptable for use; the three remaining names (‘Hoera Wharepunga Street’, ‘Haora Tipa Street’, and ‘Te Paepaetahi Street’) that were not used in the previous report have been proposed again for the local board’s consideration.

25. No objections or additional comments were received from mana whenua for any of the applicant’s names. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site Plan	59
b ⇩	Location Plan	61

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Adoption of the Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021

File No.: CP2021/10303

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021 - Attachment A.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The regional Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau (strategy) responds to changes in ngahere canopy cover and potential climate change impacts.

3. The strategy’s target is to increase tree canopy cover across all local board areas in Tāmaki Makaurau to 30 per cent by 2050.

4. The Papakura Local Board provided funding in 2020/2021 to undertake the ‘Knowing’ phase of the Urban Ngahere (Forest) programme.

5. The ‘Knowing’ phase has involved detailed analysis of the urban tree cover using a variety of data sources from the council, Statistics NZ, and other local government sources.

6. Analysis of urban tree cover and comparison with the overall extents from 2013 and 2018 was undertaken, alongside population statistics and current growth projections outlined in the Auckland Plan.

7. The report has established that urban tree coverage in the local board area is approximately 14 per cent of the overall land area in 2018. This is a 1 per cent increase from 2013.

8. The total tree cover is low when compared to the averages across the region and 1 per cent below the minimum target of 15 per cent that has been set by council in the strategy.

9. To continue increasing canopy cover in the long term a concerted effort will be required to plant new specimen trees every year.

10. Staff recommend the adoption of the Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021 - Attachment A.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) adopt the Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021(Attachment A).

b) delegate authority to the General Manager, Parks, Sport and Recreation, to make minor changes and amendments to the text and design of the Papakura Local Board Urban Ngahere (Forest) Analysis Report 2021 that are required before public release.

Horopaki

Context

11. In 2017 staff developed a regional tree strategy to address concerns around tree cover changes resulting from: development pressures, disease threats, climate change, and changes to tree protection rules.

12. The development of the strategy included workshops and consultation with elected members, mana whenua, and internal stakeholders.

13. The work resulted in the regional Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau / Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy, which was adopted by the Environment and Community Committee in February 2018 (ENV/2018/12).

14. Currently the Auckland region has an average tree canopy cover of 18 per cent.

15. The strategy sets targets that encourages all local boards to have a minimum tree canopy cover of at least 15 per cent, and on a regional scale the target is set at 30 per cent by 2050, in line with the Auckland Plan.

16. The strategy recommends implementation and analysis of the tree cover at the local level.

17. Local boards were offered the opportunity to invest in area specific Urban Ngahere programmes of work.

18. The local board Urban Ngahere programme has three phases: ‘Knowing’, ‘Growing’ and ‘Protecting’:

19. The ‘Knowing’ phase involves establishing an accurate current state analysis report with recommendations for future actions.

20. The ‘Growing’ phase involves a number of activities including annual tree plantings to address areas of low tree cover, including the development of a long-term action plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. The analysis report highlights the overall tree canopy coverage at 14 per cent for the Papakura local board area.

The report provides a number of key statistics:

· The local board area has an average tree canopy cover of 14 per cent which equates to a net 1 per cent increase compared to the 2013 figure of 13 per cent

· 17.2 per cent of parks and open space has tree canopy cover

· 8.5 per cent of other public land has tree canopy cover (schools, hospital)

· 10.7 per cent of local roads have tree canopy cover, which is low

· 72 per cent of urban tree cover exists on private land which is higher than the regional average.

22. Section 8 of the analysis report sets out key focus areas for increasing the tree canopy coverage across the local board area. These are intended to help provide long-term lasting benefits for local communities.

23. Funding for a multi-year programme of tree planting on public land in parks, open space areas and within the road corridor is necessary to help increase overall tree numbers in the local board area. A commitment to fund will enable new tree plantings, which will in the long-term help to increase overall tree canopy coverage.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24. Implementation of the strategy is an example of an integrated approach to help sequester emissions, build resilience longer term and enable adaptation to the impacts of climate change to meet council’s climate goals.

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

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

27. 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

28. Parks, Sport and Recreation (PSR) has collaborated with Community Facilities to help inform where the current maintenance and renewal programme for trees can help to improve the overall health, diversity and extent of the tree canopy cover.

29. PSR will help inform the Community Facilities 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.

30. PSR and Community Facilities will collaboratively manage the delivery of the new tree plantings in the 2022-2023 planting seasons.

31. PSR will investigate the opportunities for a wider collaborative approach across the council family to grow more trees in local communities and schools for local use.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. The Papakura Local Board Plan 2020 supports the strategy:

· Outcome six: Our natural environment is valued, protected and enhanced

Initiative: Fund the Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy to increase tree canopy and enhance biodiversity.

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

34. The local board has provided direction and support for the project at workshops in March and September 2020 to complete the ‘Knowing’ phase.

35. The local board requested a wider collaborative programme be considered with other areas of council including the Enviro-schools programme as part of the next steps for the ngahere ‘Growing’ work.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. The urban ngahere is important to mana whenua and the use of native trees will take place as the first choice in alignment with the strategy.

37. Mana whenua will be engaged to support tree planting preparation and provide a cultural narrative in the choice of species for the local areas.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38. In 2020/2021, the local board allocated $15,000 of LDI funding through the local board work programme for the ‘Knowing’ phase.

39. Due to COVID-19 and resulting delays to the ‘Knowing’ phase, $8,300 was carried forward to 2021/2022, to complete the analysis report and begin the ‘Growing’ phase.

40. The local board has allocated $10,000 of LDI funding in the 2021/2022 for development of a Ngahere Action Plan to provide long term direction on future new tree planting efforts.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41. If the board do not adopt the report and support further ngahere planning no specific new tree planting programme will take place in neighbourhood parks and along the road berms on suburban streets.

42. Current renewal planting will be the only mechanism for improving current tree asset numbers and the overall canopy cover will remain low.

43. The analysis report highlights a need for additional efforts to significantly increase tree canopy cover to help provide increased shade and the additional social and health benefits that come with more tree cover.

44. The planting of new trees is increasingly being recognised as a local solution to help with climate related changes that are taking place.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Development of the long-term Ngahere Action Plan for the planting programme. This will be workshopped with the local board in Quarter 2 to inform the prioritization process and establish minimum targets for improvement.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Papakura Urban Ngahere (Forest) Canopy Analysis Report 2021 (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Howell Davies - Senior Advisor - Urban Forest

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Papakura Youth Scholarships 2021-2022 - Criteria Change Confirmation

File No.: CP2021/10343

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the application timeline and amendment of criteria for the Papakura Youth Scholarships 2021/2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The aim of the Papakura Youth Scholarships 2021/2022 is to support the development of local young people to develop and grow as leaders.

3. Funding these scholarships will enable young people aged 14-24 to move into further education, training or attend events that will develop their leadership potential.

4. The Papakura Local Board has allocated funding toward youth scholarships in the 2021/2022 financial year work progamme.

5. Some minor changes have been made to the scholarship criteria to ensure clarity and consistency with learnings from previous years.

6. These changes require local board approval.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) approve the application timeline for the Papakura Youth Scholarships to open on 30 August 2021 and close on 1 October 2021.

b) schedule a two-hour local board assessment session on 6 October 2021, after the closing of the scholarship round, to consider and review applications prior to the 27 October business meeting decision.

c) adopt the proposed amendments to Papakura Youth Scholarships criteria outlined in Table One of this report.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Papakura Youth Scholarships have been funded by the local board for the past four years. The scholarships have enabled young people to move into further education, training and attend events that develop their leadership potential.

8. The Papakura Local Board’s work programme for 2021/2022 includes a budget of $15,000 for Papakura Youth Scholarships.

9. The local board assess the applications to ensure that they align with their priorities: to support rangatahi to develop and grow as leaders, foster Māori culture, help young people contribute, prosper and thrive; enable people to participate, celebrate and contribute to their local community and improve the overall well-being of Papakura.

10. The Papakura Youth Scholarships will be advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, and community networks.

11. The applications will be assessed by a panel of the six Papakura Local Board members and one Papakura Youth Council representative for their alignment to the following scholarship criteria:

· aged 14 to 24 years old

· in pursuit of academic excellence and trades

· enrolment in tertiary study or vocational training

· New Zealand citizen/resident

· reside in the Papakura Local Board area

· show leadership potential or have contributed to helping others

· will undertake study at a tertiary or training institution in 2022 or to participate in a conference or event in New Zealand that is significantly based on youth leadership and development.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. Staff presented changes to the application criteria at a local board workshop on 7 July 2021, as per an agreed annual review process. A primary reason for the annual review is to help improve the application experience of the rangatahi and encourage more applications.

13. Table One proposes amendments to the previous Papakura Youth Scholarships to be utilised in the forthcoming round.

Table One – proposed changes to application criteria

Current	Proposed amendment	Reason
Applicants need to be NZ citizens or permanent residents.	Add “and must reside in the Papakura Local Board area.”	This will ensure local Papakura residents benefit from the scholarships.
“who show leadership potential or have contributed to volunteer activities during the past 12 months.”	“who show leadership potential or have contributed to helping others.”	The word ‘volunteer’ be changed to ‘service’ or ‘helping others’ to recognise informal community involvement. Delete the 12-month timeframe to decrease barriers to application.
Primary phone number.	“Preferred phone number”.	Minor wording change for increased clarity.
Not stated.	“Free first year fees will not be eligible but course-related costs can still be applied for e.g. TEC funding and apprenticeships”.	Government already supports first year free fees.
Provide documentation confirming enrolment.	“Proof of enrolment confirmation to be sought post-approval and pre- payment”.	Wording in the application to be changed to require proof of enrolment prior to payment being made, as proof of enrolment into study can be difficult depending on timing, as enrolment may not have occurred at that stage. This reduces another barrier.

14. Staff also advised on opening and closing dates for the Papakura Youth Scholarship round – opening 30 August 2021 and closing on 1 October 2021. This was in consultation with the council’s Grants team to ensure their capacity to support.

15. The assessment panel will meet on 6 October 2021 to review and consider the applications.

16. The final report will be presented at the 27 October 2021 local board business meeting for decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. Staff note that due to COVID-19, there is an ongoing increase in the uptake of online and virtual education and activity. This can have a positive impact on the environment through reduced carbon emissions resulting from travel.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. The scholarships are managed and delivered by the Youth Empowerment Team with administrative support and expertise from council’s Grants Team.

19. The Local Board Communications Advisor will assist with the marketing and promotion of the scholarships.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. The Papakura Youth Scholarships align with the following 2020 Local Board Plan outcomes: a vibrant and prosperous local economy; a community enriched by its diversity, where people feel connected and lead active, healthy lives; and a partnership with Māori that creates a Papakura where Māori identity, culture and aspirations are embraced.

21. The new criteria specifying that applicants reside in the Papakura Local Board area will further align with the outcomes mentioned above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22. The 2018 census states that 26.8% identify as Māori in Papakura compared to 11.5% in Auckland. 15,438 Maori live in the local board area.

23. The Papakura Youth Scholarships show alignment to council’s Māori strategic outcomes priority 7 – realising rangatahi potential.

24. The local board priority that the Papakura Youth Scholarships show most alignment with is outcome 5 – A partnership with Māori that creates a Papakura where Māori identity, culture and aspirations are embraced.

25. As Papakura has a high Maori population, promotion of the Papakura Youth Scholarships will be targeted, for example, to the following;

· Papakura Marae and their rangatahi programmes

· Ngāti Tamaoho and their rangatahi programmes

· Papakura High School and Rosehill College

· Smith’s Ave community

· Papakura community network for forwarding to networks – YourPapakura / The Corner

· Papakura Youth Council for sharing with their networks.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. The 2021/2022 work programme includes $15,000 for the Papakura Youth Scholarships. Amending criteria will have no impact on this budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. There is a heightened risk of students not completing studies if there is another COVID-19 lockdown, especially noting some students are attending universities outside of Auckland.

28. Funds will need to be returned to the local board if activities do not go ahead and staff will advise successful applicants of this.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. Staff will work with the grants team to adjust the application form to suit the recommended changes.

30. Papakura Youth Scholarships will open for application on 30 August 2021 and close on 1 October 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Melissa Lelo – Specialist Advisor Youth Empowerment, Community and Social Innovation

Authorisers

Gael Surgenor - General Manager Community & Social Innovation

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

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

For Information: Reports referred to the Papakura Local Board

File No.: CP2021/09987

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

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

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

No.	Report Title	Item no.	Meeting Date	Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board
1	Feedback on Equity of Service Levels and Funding Proposals – Draft Report	21	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
2	Feedback on Te Waihanga New Zealand Infrastructure Commission's consultation document He Tūāpapa ki te Ora, Infrastructure for a Better Future, Aotearoa New Zealand Infrastructure Strategy	22	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
3	Feedback on Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi. Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 discussion document	23	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
4	Local Board Views on Plan Change 60 - Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters	15	17 June 2021	Howick Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
5	Economic Development Action Plan: Draft for feedback	16	17 June 2021	Howick Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

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

No.	Report Title	Item no.	Meeting Date	Governing Body Committee or Council Controlled Organisation or Forum or Local Board
1	Feedback on Equity of Service Levels and Funding Proposals – Draft Report	21	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
2	Feedback on Te Waihanga New Zealand Infrastructure Commission's consultation document He Tūāpapa ki te Ora, Infrastructure for a Better Future, Aotearoa New Zealand Infrastructure Strategy	22	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
3	Feedback on Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi. Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 discussion document	23	17 June 2021	Ōrākei Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
4	Local Board Views on Plan Change 60 - Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters	15	17 June 2021	Howick Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information
5	Economic Development Action Plan: Draft for feedback	16	17 June 2021	Howick Local Board resolutions circulated to all local boards for their information

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board - Feedback on Equity of Service Levels and Funding Proposals - Draft Report	77
b ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board - Feedback on Te Waihanga New Zealand Infrastructure Commission's consultation document He Tūāpapa ki te Ora, Infrastructure for a Better Future, Aotearoa New Zealand Infrastructure Strategy	79
c ⇩	Ōrākei Local Board - Feedback on Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi. Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 discussion document	81
d ⇩	Howick Local Board Views on Plan Change 60 - Open Space (2020) and Other Rezoning Matters	83
e ⇩	Howick Local Board Economic Development Action Plan: Draft for feedback	85

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

Papakura Local Board

28 July 2021

Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - July 2021

File No.: CP2021/09989

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

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

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

ii) clarifying what advice is required and when

iii) clarifying the rationale for reports.

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

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Papakura Local Board:

a) note the Governance Forward Work Calendar.

Horopaki

Context

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Governance role	Examples
Setting direction / priorities / budget	Capex projects, work programmes, annual plan
Local initiatives / specific decisions	Grants, road names, alcohol bans
Input into regional decision-making	Comments on regional bylaws, policies, plans
Oversight and monitoring	Local board agreement, quarterly performance reports, review projects
Accountability to the public	Annual report
Engagement	Community hui, submissions processes
Keeping informed	Briefings, local board forums

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Papakura Local Board Governance Forward Work Calendar - July 2021	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Jebel Ali - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin, Manurewa, Papakura

[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	Brent Catchpole
Deputy Chairperson	Jan Robinson
Members	Felicity Auva'a
	George Hawkins
	Keven Mealamu
	Sue Smurthwaite

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 16 June 2021	115
b ⇩	Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 23 June 2021	117
c ⇩	Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 30 June 2021	121
d ⇩	Papakura Local Board Workshop Record - 7 July 2021	125