Agenda of Rodney Local Board - Wednesday, 21 July 2021

Rodney Local Board

21 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: Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust 5

8.2 Deputation: Te Hana Charitable Trust 6

8.3 Deputation: Matakana Coast Trail Trust 6

9 Public Forum 6

9.1 Public Forum: Fight the Tip: Tiaki te Whenua Incoporated 6

10 Extraordinary Business 7

11 Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate July 2021 9

12 Auckland Transport update July 2021 17

13 Approval for extending a public road name for a subdivision at Hawkens Road, Ahuroa 23

14 New private road names for subdivision at 127 to 159 Albany Heights Road, Albany Heights 31

15 New road name in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley 39

16 Joint Council-controlled Organisations Engagement Plan 2021-2022 49

17 Draft proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 71

18 Resource management system reform: Natural and Built Environment Bill exposure draft submission 77

19 Eke Panuku Development Auckland - Rodney Local Board Six-Monthly Report to 31 March 2021 85

20 Rodney Local Board feedback on the Equity of Service Levels and Funding - Draft Report 91

21 Urgent Decision – Transport Emissions Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 99

22 Rodney Local Board workshop records 109

23 Governance forward work calendar 113

24 Consideration of Extraordinary Items

PUBLIC EXCLUDED

25 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 119

C1 Auckland Council Holiday Parks – Business Delivery Model Review 119

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

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

3 Declaration of Interest

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

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday 16 June 2021, as a true and correct record.

5 Leave of Absence

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

6 Acknowledgements

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

7 Petitions

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

8 Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Rodney 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: Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust has a requested a deputation to discuss various matters.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank the Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust for their presentation.

Attachments

a Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust presentation................................................ 123

8.2 Deputation: Te Hana Charitable Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Linda Clapham from Te Hana Charitable Trust has requested a deputation to update the local board on activities.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank Ms Clapham from Te Hana Charitable Trust for her presentation.

8.3 Deputation: Matakana Coast Trail Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The Matakana Coast Trail Trust have requested a deputation to discuss a letter of support and any other support regarding an expiring designation for a walking access at the boatyard in Warkworth.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank the Matakana Coast Trail Trust for their presentation.

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 three minutes per speaker is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

9.1 Public Forum: Fight the Tip: Tiaki te Whenua Incoporated

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Sue Crockett from Fight the Tip: Tiaki te Whenua Incorporated has request public forum time to provide an update on activities.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) thank Sue Crockett from Fight the Tip: Tiaki te Whenua Incorporated for her attendance.

10 Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate July 2021

File No.: CP2021/10156

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Rodney Local Board on the programme being delivered by Auckland Transport using the funding from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides information about the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

3. This includes updates on:

· park and ride / community hub facilities

· bus stop projects

· bus service route 128 Helensville to Silverdale

· footpath projects.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate July 2021.

Horopaki

Context

Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

4. In May 2018, the local board recommended (resolution number RD/2018/61) that the Governing Body approve a targeted rate to accelerate investment in transport in the Rodney Local Board area. The recommendation was accepted and the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate (RLBTTR) is currently scheduled to run for 10 years (2018 – 2028).

5. The local board are decision makers for funds raised through the rate, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport (AT) provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

6. The local board has delegated a project lead for the targeted rate funds, who acts as the day-to-day contact for AT.

7. The RLBTTR is ring-fenced for transport projects in the Rodney Local Board area that are not included in the Regional Land Transport Plan 2018-2028. It was established on the basis that the fund is to support:

· new bus stops and bus services

· new park and ride community hub facilities

· new footpaths.

8. The rate was established on the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area receives a proportion of the benefits of the targeted rate that equate to the proportion of the revenue collected from that subdivision.

9. As the projects develop and firmer cost estimations are prepared, changes will be required to the projects proposed within each subdivision to ensure proportionality is maintained. The Rodney Local Board monitors the performance of the projects and determines whether to re-prioritise its expenditure based on the stated purposes of the funds raised.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Park and Ride Community Hub Facilities Projects

10. The local board has selected Warkworth and Kumeū for park and ride community transport hubs.

11. The detailed design for the 80 Great North Road park and ride community transport hub site in Warkworth is complete and the local board approved the construction delivery work (resolution RD/2020/75) for the financial year 2020/21.

12. The table below outlines progress on the community transport hub project for 80 Great North Road site in Warkworth.

Warkworth park and ride community transport hub
Main Milestones	Status	% Complete	Comments
Local board approval of Warkworth Park & Ride construction site	Complete	100%	Approved July 2020
Contamination removal resource consent lodgement	Complete	100%	Lodged August 2020
Affected parties consultation on detailed design	Complete	100%
Update detailed design and issue final detailed design report	Complete	100%
Construction works for contamination removal	Complete	100%
Auckland Council resource consent approval main construction work	Complete	100%	Granted 17 April 2021
Tender evaluation of main construction work	Complete	100%	Completed April 2021
Awarding construction contract to successful contractor	Complete	100%	Awarded in May 2021

13. The Warkworth community transport hub received resource consent on 17 April 2021. AT awarded the construction contract in late May 2021. Construction works started on 14 June 2021 with the establishment of environmental controls. Construction work is expected to be completed in March 2022.

14. The local board approved a feasibility study to be undertaken in Kumeū Showgrounds in September 2020 as a potential park and ride site. Following an investigation, Auckland Transport did not recommend the proposed location due to potential added traffic in the current corridor caused by the rerouting of existing bus services to the proposed park and ride site.

15. Auckland Transport is in consultation with the local board and is undertaking internal planning work to identify a more suitable potential transport hub site in Kumeū.

Bus Stops Projects

16. In December 2020 the local board resolved (resolution number RD/2020/182) that Auckland Transport was to allocate $300,000 of RLBTTR funding to bus stops delivery at 564/571 Coatesville-Riverhead Highway (Kumeῡ subdivision).

17. Following direction from the project lead, Auckland Transport has also undertaken site assessment and design work of two bus stops on Coatesville-Riverhead Highway (Kumeū subdivision).

18. Auckland Transport initiated the bus stops design work in January 2021 with the detailed design work completed in April 2021.

19. Following completion of the detailed design the bus stops were tendered in May 2021 however the submissions received were higher than the allocated budget.

20. Following consultation with AT’s project lead, it was agreed that AT would request a reduced scope to meet available budget ($300k for construction) and agreed to defer funds to FY21/22 in June 2021.

21. Re-design was completed and agreed with AT Metro and Traffic Control Committee in June 2021. Re-tendering was undertaken and negotiation with the preferred tenderer is currently underway. AT expects to award the construction contract award is expected mid-July with construction to start in early August 2021. The construction is expected to take three weeks.

Bus Service Projects

22. The local board requested options for bus frequency increases on route 128, Helensville to Silverdale. The need for this change was identified by the community due to issues with students using the school bus in this area.

23. This route was operating using one bus on an hour and a half service, however providing an hourly service would require two buses.

24. In December 2020, the local board approved (resolution number RD/2020/180) to fund this increase in frequency.

25. The approved option was for the Helensville to Silverdale (128) bus service to change to an hourly weekday service and a two-hourly weekend service, at an approximate additional cost of $313,785 per annum.

26. The additional bus service started operating in May 2021 and will be reviewed in December 2021.

Footpath Projects

27. The local board approved (resolution RD/2020/162, RD/2021/205 and RD/2021/247) on a list of footpaths ready for delivery during FY20/21 – FY21/22.

28. The table below outlines the progress of footpaths projects in current delivery.

Footpath Project	Subdivision	Progress Update
Omaha Drive	Warkworth	• Current progress: Tender prices received higher than budget. Local board approved budget increase and tender awarded. • Current issues: Resource consent amendment is required due to a design change at the golf club carpark following discussions with the bowling club and council. Not expected to impact works. • Next steps: Programmed to commence construction works on 9 August 2021. This is a later date than originally planned/agreed with the contractor to avoid wettest months of the year and allow additional time to obtain resource consent amendment
Dairy Flat Highway outside Dairy Flat School	Dairy Flat	• Current progress: Local board approved increased budget and tender awarded (resolution RD/2021/247) • Current issues: Delay to expected construction start date due to contractor resources. • Next steps: Undertake construction works. Expect to commence in early August and complete at the end of September.
School Road	Wellsford	• Current progress: Design consultant had been appointed early 2021 and detailed design including firm cost estimates are work in progress. Currently preliminary drawings and cost estimates have been developed. • Current issues No issues. • Next steps: Preliminary drawings / cost estimates are under internal consultation and will go out externally as inform only.
Alice Street, Riverhead	Kumeū	• Current progress: Design consultant had been appointed early 2021 and detailed design including firm cost estimates are a work in progress. Currently preliminary drawings and cost estimates have been developed. • Current issues No issues. • Next steps: Preliminary drawings / cost estimates are under internal consultation and will go out externally as inform only.
Leigh Road	Warkworth	• Current progress: Design consultant has been appointed early 2021 and detailed design including firm cost estimates are a work in progress. Currently preliminary drawings and cost estimates have been developed. • Current issues There are no current issues to report. Due to the location of the proposed footpath there was previous concerns around the presence of rock outcrops and residual soils. Geotechnical investigations to assess the upslope geology and slope stability and possible need for retaining have been mitigated and is no longer a concern. An arborist assessment was also completed and there is no concern. • Next steps: Preliminary drawings / cost estimates are under internal consultation and will go out externally as inform only.
Coatesville Riverhead Highway	Dairy Flat	• Current progress: Tender request for offer of detailed design and firm cost estimates (consultancy services) has been released and expected proposal submission by July 2021. • Current issues: No issues. • Next steps: Proposal evaluation and contract award anticipated to successful consultant and to be advised by end of July 2021.
Newton Road, Riverhead	Kumeū	• Current progress: Tender request for offer of detailed design and firm cost estimates (consultancy services) has been released and expected appointment of consultant is expected by July 2021. • Current issues: There are no issues to report at present. • Next steps: Proposal evaluation and contract award to successful consultant to be advised by end of July 2021
Rodney Street	Wellsford	• Current progress: Investigation and design contract awarded to Opus. A site visit was carried out to explore different options and report will be available by mid July 2021. • Current issues: No issues. • Next steps: AT will organise a workshop with the local board in late July 2021 to discuss all options.
Dairy Flat Highway – Postman Road to Dairy Flat School	Dairy Flat	• Current progress: Design scoping document is developed and is currently under internal review. • Current issues: No issues. • Next steps: To release tender documents to the market for offer of service to undertake detailed design work.
Cambridge Road, Duke Street & Matua Road	Kumeū	• Current progress: Design scoping revised to reflect the new footpath recently installed by a developer working in the area between no. 7 & 20 Cambridge Rd. This footpath was not existing at the time the initial scoping document was prepared/issued based on the project’s mandate. Design Consultant’s offer is expected to be received by 16 July 2021. Investigation and design works will then commence after the award. • Current issues: We are currently awaiting further information from council on the extent of the developer’s work. • Next steps: receive/evaluate the consultant’s offer of the design services, award the contract and commence the investigation and design works.
Tranch 3 – Footpath Investigation	Rodney area	• Current progress: The investigation contract was awarded in late June 2021 and pre-start meeting was organised with the consultant to start the investigation works • Current issues: No issues • Next steps: Review of background information and reports. Followed by desktop study and site visits.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29. The RLBTTR contributes to the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 outcome of: “A green Auckland – By reducing our reliance on petrol, air pollution and green-house gas emissions.”

30. The RLBTTR also supports the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan and council’s priorities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. The proposed decision of receiving this update report has no impacts on the wider council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. The local board are decision makers for funds raised through the RLBTTR, Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

33. Auckland Transport also receives regular guidance from the local board’s RLBTTR project lead.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. The proposed decision of receiving this report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual-project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. There are no financial implications in receiving this update report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. Auckland Transport providing regular updates on the RLBTTR, and separate decision reports on specific projects, is a mitigation to ensure the local board is fully informed before making any decisions with regards to the fund.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. Auckland Transport will provide regular update reports to the Rodney Local Board at a future business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Ali Rajaiy – Rodney Transport Targeted Rates Programme Manager

Ben Halliwell – Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Tarun Ahuja – Delivery Manager North/West

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Auckland Transport update July 2021

File No.: CP2021/10253

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to Rodney Local Board members on transport related matters in their area, including the Local Board Transport Capital Fund and Auckland Transport’s Community Safety Fund.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report covers:

· a summary of Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

· a summary of the local board’s Transport Capital Fund and Community Safety Fund projects

· a summary of general information items.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport update July 2021.

Horopaki

Context

3. Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. As set out in our Local Board Engagement Plan, we report on a monthly basis to local boards. This monthly reporting commitment acknowledges the important role local boards play in the governance of Auckland on behalf of their local communities.

4. This report updates the local board on Auckland Transport projects and operations in the Rodney Local Board area, it summarises consultations and Traffic Control Committee decisions, and includes information on the status of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) and Community Safety Fund (CSF).

5. The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by the Governing Body and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme.

6. The CSF is a capital budget established by Auckland Transport for use by local boards to fund local road safety initiatives. The purpose of this fund is to allow elected members to address long-standing local road safety issues that are not regional priorities and are therefore not being addressed by the Auckland Transport programme.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Auckland Transport projects and operations in the local board area

7. The table below has a general summary of projects of interest to the local board with their current status. Please note that all timings are indicative and are subject to change:

Name	AT area	Update
Matakana Link Road	Major Projects	Although the project has been faced with relatively bad weather recently, the Matakana Link Road project has continued with the construction of the bridge, wetland and stormwater. The road diversion on Matakana Road is working well, allowing works to proceed on the roundabout without being an inconvenience to road users and the construction team. A good summer season allowed for the bulk of the earthworks. The next works on site will be the continuation of the bridge, roundabout and the installation of service trenches. The project is within time and budget.
Huapai Improvements (Huapai Special Housing Area)	Major Projects	SH16/Access Road – designs are now finalised and we will be closing out the consultation in the coming weeks. Final designs and brief, including details of upcoming enabling works will be provided to the Board. Station Road - Following a safety audit the project has made revisions to the design to improve safety. We will brief the local board in more detail and this will be followed with further consultation with Huapai District School and affected residents on Station Road.
Hill Street intersection Improvement	Major Projects	AT has funding approved for detailed design for the Hill St project. The Auckland share of the funding for construction has been included in the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP), however the balance of funding will need to be approved from Waka Kotahi as part of the National Land Transport Programme.
Matakana Road - Melwood Drive to Green Road	Road Safety	AT Safety is currently investigating this corridor for improvements. This is likely to include improvements to road markings, skid resistance at bends and provide/upgrade guardrail at high-risk locations. The project is currently programmed for FY21/22 installation, subject to the funding availability.
Sandspit Road Safety	Road Safety	This involves shape correction, shoulder widening and improving the surfacing at the bend near Hamilton Road intersection. This project is currently under construction and will be completed in the next couple months.
Dairy Flat Highway Area Wide Treatment - Pine Valley Road to Green Road	Road Safety	A wide centerline treatment between Pine Valley Road and Green Road to mitigate the risk associated with head-on type issues for this corridor, as part of the overall Dairy Flat Highway safety improvements. Under construction, at 90 per cent completion.
Coatesville Riverhead and Old Railway Intersection	Road Safety	To provide a safer turning facility for vehicles turning from Coatesville-Riverhead Highway into Old Railway Road. i.e. right-turn bay. This project is currently at external consultation with the community. The project is programmed for FY21/22 construction.
Paremoremo Road corridor improvement	Road Safety	This project is under investigation and primarily focused on improving the road markings and signage for the section between Hobson and Lona, as part of the Rural Delineation Programme.
Rural Delineation Project – Improved delineation and signage on rural roads.	Road Safety	Under construction.
New bus stop and shelter - 984 Matakana Rd, Matakana	AT Metro	Under construction.
New bus stop and shelter - 987 Matakana Rd, Matakana	AT Metro	Schedule for construction in the 2021/22 financial year, timings to be confirmed.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund

8. Following the Auckland Council Emergency Budget, the amount of funding in the Local Board Transport Capital Fund for 2020/2021 was $286,459. At the November 2020 business meeting the local board resolved (RD/2020/162) that:

· $235,000 would be allocated for the delivery of the Hudson Road footpath project with the remaining balance of $398,000 to be allocated from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate

· $52,000 from the Local Board Transport Capital fund for completing the design for the Dairy Flat School footpath. With the remaining balance of $440,000 to be allocated from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Item

Update

Hudson Road Footpath

Complete.

Diary Flat School Footpath

The tender has been awarded to the company Traffic Systems Limited (TSL) for Dairy Flat School. TSL has indicated that they plan to commence works on the 19^th July 2021.

The team had a pre-start meeting last week, at which the Dairy Flat School principal and a member of the board of trustees also attended.

9. The current amount of funding proposed in the draft Regional Land Transport Plan for the Rodney Local Board is $2,361,062

Community Safety Fund

10. The CSF is funded from Auckland Transport’s safety budget and is dependent on the level of funding Auckland Transport receives from council.

11. The below table has an update on the projects in the fund:

Priority	Project	Update
1	Motutara Road – crossing	In detailed design.
2	Motutara Road - footpath extension	Removed from CSF following consultation.
3	Coatesville – speed calming	Driver feedback sign has been installed.
4	Matakana Road – signalised mid-block	In construction.
5	Matua / Tapu Road – intersection improvements	Detailed design complete. Construction is dependent on budget availability.
6	Matua / Oraha Road – intersection improvements	Road Safety Audit has identified a missing crossing link across the northern side of Matua Rd. This will need to be investigated and may result in further parking loss and therefore reconsulted externally. This is also budget dependent.
7	Rata Street - pedestrian crossing	Detail design complete. Construction is dependent on budget availability.
8	Kaipara College - pedestrian crossing	Detail design complete. Construction is dependent on budget availability.
9	Waitoki School – speed calming	Removed from CSF as per local board decision.
10	Whangateau - speed warning signs	Completed.
11	Kumeu – signalised mid bloc crossing	Completed.
12	Woodcocks Road – crossing	Completed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

12. Auckland Transport engages closely with council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan and council’s priorities.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

14. The impact of information in this report is confined to Auckland Transport and does 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

15. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no local, sub-regional or regional impacts.

16. Please see below for a summary of items sent to the local board for their information or feedback:

Item	Date sent to local board
FYI: Rural Delineation Programme	03/05/21
FYI: Mahurangi East Road, Snells Beach – Pedestrian improvements	04/05/21
FYI: speed limit changes on 26 roads	07/05/21
FYI: School Road, Wellsford - Raised Pedestrian Crossing	07/05/21
FYI: Future Connect Update	11/05/21
FYI: Daily Fare Cap	20/05/21
FYI: Land-owner letter - Hill St Intersection Improvements	21/05/21
FYI: upcoming night works	24/05/21
FYI: Parking Strategy Review	8/06/21
FYI: Public Feedback on the RLTP	8/06/21
Update: Warkworth community transport hub	10/06/21
FYI: Coatesville-Riverhead Highway & Old Railway Road, Kumeu - Intersection Improvements	11/06/21
FYI: School Road, Wellsford - Raised Pedestrian Crossing	01/07/21
FYI: Rodney Local Board DSI 2016-2020	02/07/21
FYI: Sandspit Road, Warkworth - Safety Crash Barriers	07/07/21
FYI: Matakana Road, Matakana - Safety Crash Barrier	07/07/21

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18. There are no financial implications in receiving this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no risks. Auckland Transport has risk management strategies in place for all their projects.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

20. Auckland Transport will provide a further report to the Rodney Local Board at its September busines meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Halliwell, Elected Member Relationship Manager

Authorisers

Paul Thompson – Head of Community Engagement

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Approval for extending a public road name for a subdivision at Hawkens Road, Ahuroa

File No.: CP2021/09507

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval to use the existing name for the extension of Hawkens Road within the completed subdivision, at Hawkens Road, Ahuroa.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development the applicant shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the local board’s approval. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

3. The applicant, Cash Cow Limited, proposes that the existing name, ‘Hawkens Road’, be used for the extension of that road.

4. The proposed road name has been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming 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 technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed name is not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve the existing name of ‘Hawkens Road’ for the extension of that road within the subdivision at Hawkens Road, Ahuroa, undertaken by Cash Cow Limited, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki

Context

5. The seven-lot subdivision, (Council Ref SUB60034591), now completed, was approved in 2013.

6. Site and location plans of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A and B.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the guidelines) 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

9. The guidelines require road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

10. Theme: The applicant considers that the existing name is appropriate as it reflects the pioneering history of the area. The Hawkens family is one of the oldest local pioneer families that owned all the land within and surrounding the subdivision.

11. Assessment: The name chosen has been assessed by the Council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that it meets both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. In this instance given the alignment of the extension of the road it is logical to use the existing name.

12. Confirmation: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has accepted the name for use at this location.

13. Road type: The road type of “Road” is an acceptable type for the road being the extension of Hawkens Road.

14. Consultation: Mana whenua were not consulted given the name Hawkens Road already exists

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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.

19. The guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications but in this instance, it is considered that the process is not necessary.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

21. 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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

23. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Hawkens Road Locality Map	27
b ⇩	Hawkens Road Scheme Plan	29

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Frank Lovering – Senior Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

New private road names for subdivision at 127 to 159 Albany Heights Road, Albany Heights

File No.: CP2021/09709

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval to name the two private roads which are commonly owned access lots within the subdivision being undertaken by XXL Brothers Limited, at 127 to 159 Albany Heights Road, Albany Heights.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the Council for proposed road names. These guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development the applicant shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the local board’s approval. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

3. XXL Brothers Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board:

Preferred Names

Patrick Silver Place Road No.1

Seahawk Place Road No. 2

Alternatives for either Road 1 or Road 2

Emerald Stream Lane

Pukaki Lane

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming 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 technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by these guidelines.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve two new road names as follows for the two private roads within the subdivision at 127 to 159 Albany Heights Road, Albany Heights, being undertaken by XXL Brothers Limited, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 and referenced in Attachments A and B of the agenda report

i) Patrick Silver Place (Road No. 1)

ii) Seahawk Place (Road No. 2).

Horopaki

Context

5. The 23-lot subdivision, (Council Ref SUB60303645-A), currently under construction was approved on 25 September 2020.

6. Site and location plans of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A and B of the agenda report.

7. In accordance with the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (guidelines) and the standards, any road including private ways, commonly owned access lots, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots, generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering. Road No 1 serves 15 lots and Road No 2 serves six lots.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. 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.

9. The guidelines require road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

10. Theme: The applicant has put forward four names which they consider to be reflective of the area. One name, ‘Pukaki Lane’ has been offered by local iwi.

11. In this regard the names and their relevance are detailed as below:

Proposed Names	Meaning (as described by the applicant)
Patrick Silver Place (Road No 1)	The previous landowner of Irish descent “Patrick” is suggested in relation to the traditional Irish St Patricks day. “Silver” is in relation to Silverdale, the suburb of the development.
Seahawk Place (Road No 2)	The nearby Silverdale rugby and netball teams are called the “Seahawks” This club has been a critical part of the Silverdale culture since their establishment back in 1887.
Emerald Stream Lane (alternative)	“Emerald” for the relation to Irish descent of previous landowner history. “Stream” for the Weiti Stream nearby the development.
Pukaki Lane (alternative)	Meaning the streams and creeks all around this area of interest.

12. 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.

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

14. Road type: The road types “Lane” and “Place” are acceptable road types for the new private roads.

15. Consultation: Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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.

20. On 9 March 2021 13 mana whenua groups with an interest in the general area were contacted by Council on behalf of the applicant through the Resource Consent Department’s Central Facilitation process as set out in the guidelines.

21. By the close of the consultation period two responses had been received from Te Kawerau a Maki and Ngāti Manuhiri.

22. Ngāti Manuhuri did not support the names and stated that they would provide alternatives.

23. Ngāti Manuhiri subsequently put forward two further names, ‘Pukaki’ and ‘Manuka’, however the name ‘Manuka’ was rejected by LINZ as it was already in use nearby.

24. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albany Heights Scheme Plan	35
b ⇩	Albany Heights Locality Map 2	37

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

New road name in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley

File No.: CP2021/10215

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Rodney Local Board to name one new private road in the Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council has road naming guidelines that 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.

3. Previously Road No. 2 (Private Road) was named by the Rodney Local Board at its 9 December 2020 busines meeting (Resolution RD/2020/183), as ‘Koura Lane’ however this name was subsequently found to have been used on another development despite having passed the check at Land Information New Zealand.

4. Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited have resubmitted the following names for consideration.

Preferred Name	Alternative Name
Kueo Lane	Whurutu Lane

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve Fulton Hogan Land Development name ‘Kueo Lane’ for the one new private road within subdivision at 17 Old Pine Valley Road, Pine Valley, replacing the previously approved name ‘Koura Lane’, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 and as referenced in Attachments A, B and C to the agenda report.

Horopaki

Context

5. The staged subdivision at Silverdale has been approved and the council reference is BUN60313354.

6. A condition of the subdivision consent was to suggest to council names for the new roads.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (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.

8. Auckland Council’s road naming criteria typically require that road names reflect:

· a historical or ancestral linkage to an area

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

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

· the use of Māori names is actively encouraged.

9. The applicant has submitted the following names and their meaning for consideration.

Proposed Names	Meaning
Kueo	Māori name for common berry used in food and medicine
Whurutu	Māori name for fruits of all types

10. Further details about the applicant’s strategy for road naming in the Milldale development can be found in Attachment C, ‘Milldale Road Naming – Stage 3 – Milldale Additional Jointly owned access lots.’

11. This report is to seek approval for one new name to replace the previously approved name ‘Koura Lane’ with one of the proposed new names - Kueo Lane or Whurutu Lane.

12. The area is in an undulating valley between the Orewa and Weiti Rivers that was once covered in dense forest, milled extensively, then cleared for orchards and dairy farming.

13. All communication with iwi has been with Fiona McKenzie of the Manuhiri Kaitiaki Charitable Trust, see attached notes in the above “Milldale Road Naming – -Stage 3 – Milldale - Additional JOALS”

14. This communication is in combination with extensive research and reference to Robin Grover’s books: ‘The Story of Silverdale, ‘Alias the Wade’ and ‘Why the Hibiscus’.

15. The officer acknowledges that where possible the use of Māori names is encouraged in the Auckland Plan.

16. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that the proposed road names are unique and acceptable and not duplicated elsewhere in the region.

17. The proposed names are deemed to meet the council’s road naming guidelines and the officer’s recommendation is to approve the applicant’s choice.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impacts on any council groups.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate impacts on the community.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. The naming of roads is linked to the Auckland Plan Outcome “A Māori identity that is Auckland’s point of difference in the world”. The use of Māori names for roads, buildings and other public places is an opportunity to publicly demonstrate Māori identity. To aid local board decision making, the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines includes:

· the objective of recognising ancestral linkages to areas of land by engagement with mana whenua and the allocation of road names as appropriate and a principle that Māori road names are actively encouraged

22. An agreed process to enable mana whenua to provide timely feedback on all proposed road names in a manner they consider appropriate. The road names proposed in this report have also been provided to all mana whenua for consideration through council’s central facilitator. Feedback has been received from Nga Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust who agreed with the proposed names. No other feedback was received

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process with consultation being a key part of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

26. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Milldale Scheme Plan Private Roads	43
b ⇩	Milldale Stage 3 Locality Map	45
c ⇩	Milldale Stage 3 Additional JOALS	47

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Joint Council-controlled Organisations Engagement Plan 2021-2022

File No.: CP2021/09792

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For the local board to adopt its Joint Council-controlled Organisations 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 council-controlled organisations would work with local boards to implement. Recommendation 34 (b) of the 2020 Council-controlled Organisations Review advised the preparation of joint council-controlled organisations engagement plans for each local board.

4. A template for the joint engagement plan has been developed in conjunction with local board members and council-controlled organisations 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 council-controlled organisations staff. Local boards have provided their views on council-controlled organisations 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 Council-controlled Organisations Engagement Plan 2021-2022 that is provided as Attachment A to the agenda report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

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

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

c) authorise the chairperson to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, in conjunction with representatives from the four Council-controlled Organisations.

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 Eke 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 four 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, Eke 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.

Developing 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 10-year Budget 2021-2031 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 Council-controlled Organisations 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 Council-controlled Organisations 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 communities.

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 Council-controlled Organisations 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 ⇩	Rodney Local Board Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022	55

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead, Senior Advisor Operations and Planning

Authorisers

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Draft proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2021/10153

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 2021, deliberations for March 2022 and a final Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport decision for April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney 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 local 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 inconsistent 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

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

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

File No.: CP2021/09967

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

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

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Government is undertaking comprehensive reform of the Resource Management Act 1991.

3. Cabinet has agreed to the repeal and replacement of the Resource Management Act 1991 with three pieces of legislation: a Natural and Built Environments Act, a Spatial Planning Act, and a Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act.

4. The first area of focus is the proposed Natural and Built Environments Bill. Key aspects of this have been released in an exposure draft which will form the basis of a select committee inquiry. Submissions on the inquiry close on 4 August 2021.

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

6. Auckland Council will make a submission on the Natural and Built Environments Bill and local board input is being sought for inclusion on this submission, closing on 26 July 2021.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

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

Horopaki

Context

Resource management system reform

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

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

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

10. After receiving the Panel’s report, Cabinet decided to proceed with Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) reform largely modelled on the Panel’s recommendations.

11. Cabinet agreed to the following objectives for reform:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The NBA exposure draft and Select Committee Inquiry Process

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

15. The purpose of the inquiry is to provide feedback on the extent to which the provisions in the exposure draft of the Natural and Built Environments Bill will support the resource management reform objectives stated in paragraph 10.

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

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

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

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

· process to develop the National Planning Framework

· consenting

· existing use rights

· allocation of resources, and economic instruments

· compliance, monitoring and enforcement

· water conservation orders

· heritage orders

· designations

· subdivision

· transitional provisions

· provision for urban design, including urban tree cover

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

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Summary of the Natural and Built Environments Act exposure draft

19. The exposure draft contains proposed clauses relating to:

· key definitions

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

· Te Tiriti o Waitangi

· environmental limits including their purpose and key requirements

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

· implementation principles

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

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

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

Purpose and related provisions

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

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

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

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

· the health of the natural environment

· the intrinsic relationship between iwi and hapū and te taiao

· the interconnectedness of all parts of the natural environment

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

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

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

25. The proposed purpose largely aligns with the council’s submission to the Panel.

Principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi

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

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

Environmental limits

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

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

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

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

Environmental Outcomes

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

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

34. They cover outcomes related to:

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

· ecological integrity

· outstanding natural features and landscapes

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

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

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

· the mana and mauri of the natural environment

· cultural heritage, including cultural landscapes

· protected customary rights

· greenhouse gas emissions

· urban areas

· housing supply

· rural areas

· infrastructure services

· natural hazards and climate change.

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

Key clauses for the National Planning Framework

36. The NPF will include and replace existing forms of national direction and combine their existing functions and powers. This approach was supported by council’s submission to the Panel.

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

38. The NPF will:

· prescribe environmental limits or enable plans to do so

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

· effective and proportionate public consultation

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

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

· robust evaluation and analysis

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

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

Implementation principles

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

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

Key clauses for the Natural and Built Environments Plans

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

· legal status of planning committees.

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

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

System efficiencies

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

Further material

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

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

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

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Mark Macfarlane - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Helgard Wagener - Acting Policy and Planning Manager

Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Eke Panuku Development Auckland - Rodney Local Board Six-Monthly Report to 31 March 2021

File No.: CP2021/07275

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Rodney Local Board on Eke Panuku Development Auckland activities within the local board area and the region, for the period from 1 September 2020 to 31 March 2021.

2. This report is for information only and no decision-making is required.

3. It includes information on property management, purchases and sales in relation to the local board area, which Eke Panuku Development Auckland undertakes on behalf of Auckland Council.

4. Please note that this report is for seven months. This is to align future reports with other Eke Panuku Development Auckland reporting cycles.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

5. This report is a record of events for the Rodney Local Board area during the stated period.

6. While Eke Panuku Development Auckland is an urban regeneration agency, its main function within the Rodney Local Board area is to manage properties owned by Auckland Council.

7. Eke Panuku Development Auckland currently manages 37 leases in the Rodney Local Board area, including Ti Point.

8. Eke Panuku Development Auckland has also sold one property on behalf of the council in the local board area during the reporting period.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) receive the Eke Panuku Development Auckland - Rodney Local Board six-monthly report to 31 March 2021.

Horopaki

Context

9. Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku) is the council-controlled organisation that delivers urban regeneration in Tāmaki Makaurau (Auckland). Urban regeneration is the planning of neighbourhoods and the improvement of buildings and spaces to strengthen communities and the economy to make it an even better place to live.

10. Our city is facing rapid growth. Quality development is required to accommodate this growth and to ensure people love and can afford to live in Auckland. We imagine a city of strong neighbourhoods. We work across many neighbourhoods throughout our city from large, long-term urban regeneration plans to small projects on specific sites to meet the needs of the city’s long-term growth - including more types of homes people can afford. We work alongside the locals, other parts of the council and businesses to regenerate our city in ways that benefit both our local communities and Auckland as a whole.

11. We deliver returns for the council, and at the same time, we ensure our assets contribute positively to the neighbourhoods of Tāmaki Makaurau. We manage around $2.4 billion of land and buildings owned by the Auckland Council.

12. In the period 1 September 2020 to 31 March 2021, we continued our urban regeneration programme across the region, brought a $22.8m return to the council via property management, purchased six properties on behalf of the group, and sold nine properties as part of either our neighbourhood regeneration or as directed by Auckland Council.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Property management and properties of Rodney Local Board interest

13. Eke Panuku manages 37 leases in the Rodney Local Board area.

14. The Rodney Local Board has expressed interest in updates on properties within the Eke Panuku property portfolio. The table below provides an update on matters of significance for the reporting period:

Property

Status

Ti Point

Eke Panuku manage the Ti Point Forest site’s forestry activities on behalf of Auckland Council. We take a collaborative approach to the maintenance depending on the specific areas of the site. A portion of the site is forestry with the balance predominately landfill, which is managed by Auckland Council.

The forestry harvesting is being managed in two stages. The first stage of forestry has been felled, and the second stage is on hold until further notice.

Acquisitions

15. Eke Panuku has purchased no properties on behalf of the Auckland Council group in the Rodney Local Board area during the reporting period 1 September 2020 to 31 March 2021.

Disposals

16. On behalf of the Auckland Council, Eke Panuku sells properties that are no longer required by the Auckland Council group for service use.

17. The decision to sell these properties is made by Auckland Council’s Governing Body with advice from its finance team.

18. Eke Panuku does not have a decision-making role in the sale of properties that are surplus to the council’s requirements.

19. The role of Eke Panuku is to provide property transaction services. Proceeds from these sales are returned to Auckland Council to be reinvested in council services.

20. The following unconditional agreements were reached in the reporting period:

Address	Status	Settlement
1580 SH1, Wellsford	Acquired in 2004 for reserve and industrial subdivision with a new roading system. No longer required.	4 September 2020

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. The Eke Panuku Priority Location programmes support the regeneration of existing town centres while also addressing climate mitigation and adaptation.

22. Mitigation of climate change involves reducing the carbon emissions that contribute to climate change. Our Priority Locations are transport-oriented communities that utilise existing infrastructure and transport links and we seek to make local walking and cycling safe and viable alternatives to the private vehicle. Eke Panuku has also adopted a Homestar-6 minimum standard to ensure we can reduce energy, water and landfill waste. We are working to adopt similar standards for our public realm and commercial developments, whilst also taking guidance from precinct sustainability rating tools like Green Star Communities.

23. Adaptation to climate change involves planning for the changes to our climate and associated impacts that are already happening or are projected to happen, including sea-level rise, hotter temperatures, extreme weather events, flooding and droughts. Climate change is likely to subject the Rodney Local Board area to hotter temperatures and more frequent flooding and drought. Eke Panuku seeks to future-proof our communities by:

· specifying that infrastructure and developments are designed to cope with warmer temperatures and extreme weather events

· the use of green infrastructure and water sensitive design to increase flood resilience and provide ecological and biodiversity benefits

· the provision of increased shade and shelter for storm events and hotter days

· initiatives to build community resilience

24. In October, the Eke Panuku executive team agreed to a work programme of priority actions to help Eke Panuku deliver on the council’s sustainable procurement objectives which Eke Panuku has adopted. Targeting these objectives will help further leverage the economic, social and environmental benefits of Eke Panuku urban regeneration projects and the products and services we procure as a business. Implementation of these priority projects has commenced which focus on embedding sustainable procurement into Eke Panuku procurement processes and systems, including the inclusion of climate considerations into procurements for capital works and renewals.

25. The Eke Panuku Climate Change Strategy was adopted by the Eke Panuku Board in November. The strategy guides how Eke Panuku will support the implementation of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. Eke Panuku cannot achieve its vision alone. Our complex operating environment means we need the expertise of others. Therefore, building and maintaining strong relationships and partnerships, and working together with others in general, is an ongoing focus for us.

27. Eke Panuku Development Auckland works collaboratively with other Auckland Council departments, council-controlled organisations and Crown agencies to deliver joined-up urban regeneration in our neighbourhoods.

28. Impacts and views are considered both on a programme and project level for the neighbourhoods we work in, to maximise community outcomes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. Any local or sub-regional impacts are considered on a programme and project basis.

30. Eke Panuku regularly engages with local boards on its projects and programmes within local board areas.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. Eke Panuku supports the aspirations described in the Auckland Plan 2050.

32. Eke Panuku has worked closely with our mana whenua partners to understand their priorities in Tāmaki Makaurau. Mana whenua have shared their top five aspirations with Eke Panuku. Below is a summary:

· Governance: We involve mana whenua in transparent decision-making.

· Culture: We will increase our practice of kaitiakitanga (by all) and increase the visibility of Māori identity and culture in our projects.

· Economic: We will create more commercial investment, procurement, and engagement opportunities for Māori.

· Social: We will foster a sense of community and connectedness and help enhance the well-being of Māori here in Tāmaki Makaurau.

· Natural environment: We will work together to ensure we are working towards significant improvements to te mauri o te taiao.

33. Eke Panuku continues to make progress on the Eke Panuku Mana Whenua Outcomes Framework actions and presented a six-month status report to mana whenua in February 2021.

34. Eke Panuku has achieved 36/40 significant initiatives in the 2020-2021 financial year. Highlights include the numerous whakawātea with our mana whenua partners to celebrate significant milestones to build the stage for the 2021 America’s Cup.

35. Following the Emergency Budget 2020/2021, Eke Panuku is still working with mana whenua to identify potential development and disposal opportunities. Eke Panuku has invited mana whenua to register commercial interests in properties Eke Panuku is preparing to dispose of on the market.

36. Eke Panuku has started a pilot programme focused on growing the capability of young leaders to enable placemaking activities. The programme, He Pia He Tauira, has hosted several wānanga with tauira to prepare for upcoming activities.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

37. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. There are no risks associated with receiving this report.

39. This report must be received to meet the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. The next six-monthly report will cover the period 1 April to 30 September 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Perin Gerrand - Engagement Coordinator

Authorisers

Joanna Glasswell - Head of Corporate Affairs

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

21 July 2021

Urgent Decision – Transport Emissions Pathways to Net Zero by 2050

File No.: CP2021/09301

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To inform the Rodney Local Board that an urgent decision was made and approved under delegation to the chairperson and deputy chairperson to provide feedback on Auckland Council’s draft submission on the Ministry of Transport’s discussion document Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi: Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At the 20 November 2019 Rodney Local Board meeting the local board considered the urgent decision-making process and passed resolution RD/2019/147:

That the Rodney Local Board:

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

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

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

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

3. The Ministry of Transport has released a discussion document, Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi: Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050, on transport emissions reduction pathways for Aotearoa to support the Government’s net zero carbon by 2050 goal.

4. Hīkina te Kohupara will inform the Government’s first Emissions Reduction Plan (due to be released at the end of December 2021) and support the development of a 10-15 year transport emissions action plan for New Zealand.

5. Local boards have a role in representing the views of their communities on issues of local importance, such as proving feedback on the local effects of central government proposals in Auckland Council submissions.

6. The draft Auckland Council submission on Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi: Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 was circulated to elected members on 18 June 2021.

7. The deadline for local board feedback to be appended to the final Auckland Council submission was 23 June 2021.

8. The last Rodney Local Board business meeting was held on 16 June 2021, and its next business meeting was 21 July 2021.

9. This timeframe did not align with scheduled Rodney Local Board business meetings and it was therefore necessary to seek an urgent decision to formalise the local board’s position.

10. A staff memo that was circulated on 28 May 2021 which provides information on council’s submission on Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi: Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050, the timeframes for developing Auckland Council’s submission and how local boards can provide feedback is contained in Attachment B to the agenda report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) note Rodney Local Board’s feedback on the draft Auckland Council submission on the Ministry of Transport’s document Hīkina te Kohupara – Kia mauri ora ai te iwi: Transport Emissions: Pathways to Net Zero by 2050 approved by the chairperson and deputy chairperson under delegation (Attachment A to the agenda report).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Rodney Local Board decision under urgency	101
b ⇩	Memo to local boards	105

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Justin Kary – Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

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

[3] Local board representatives were Margie 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	Phelan Pirrie
Deputy Chairperson	Beth Houlbrooke
Members	Brent Bailey
	Steve Garner
	Danielle Hancock
	Tim Holdgate
	Louise Johnston
	Vicki Kenny
	Colin Smith

Local Board Member	Organisation	Position
Brent Bailey	Central Shooters Inc Auckland Shooting Club Royal NZ Yacht Squadron	President Member Member
Steven Garner	Warkworth Tennis and Squash Club Sandspit Yacht Club Warkworth Gamefish Club	President Member Member
Louise Johnston	Blackbridge Environmental Protection Society	Treasurer
Vicki Kenny	International Working Holidays Ltd Nannies Abroad Ltd Waitemata Riding Club National Party Helensville Electorate	Director/Owner/CEO Director/Owner/CEO Member Treasurer
Danielle Hancock	Kaukapakapa Residents and Ratepayers Association Pest Free Kaukapakapa New Zealand Biosecurity Services Limited	Member Pest Free Coordinator Operations Manager
Tim Holdgate	Landowners Contractors Protection Association Agricultural & Pastoral Society - Warkworth	Vice Chairman Committee member
Beth Houlbrooke	Kawau Island Boat Club Springboard Advisory Board Matakana Coast Trail Trust	Member Member Contractor
Phelan Pirrie	Muriwai Volunteer Fire Brigade Grow West Ltd North West Country Incorporated	Officer in Charge Director Manager
Colin Smith

Author	Anwen Robinson - Senior Local Board Advisor
Authorisers	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Author	Robyn Joynes - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager