I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Regulatory Committee will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 12 October 2021

10.00am

This meeting will be held remotely and a recording of the meeting will be available on: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/meetings-council-bodies/Pages/webcasts-council-meetings.aspx.

 

Komiti Whakahaere ā-Ture /

Regulatory Committee

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Cr Linda Cooper, JP

 

Deputy Chairperson

Cr Josephine Bartley

 

Members

Cr Dr Cathy Casey

 

 

Deputy Mayor Cr Bill Cashmore

 

 

Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins

 

 

Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP

 

 

Cr Shane Henderson

 

 

Cr Daniel Newman, JP

 

 

Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM

 

 

IMSB Chair David Taipari

 

 

Member Glenn Wilcox

 

 

Cr Paul Young

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Sophie White

Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Governance Advisor

 

5 October 2021

 

Contact Telephone: 0211836328

Email: sophie.r.white@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 



Terms of Reference

 

Responsibilities

 

The committee is responsible for regulatory hearings (required by relevant legislation) on behalf of the council.   The committee is responsible for appointing independent commissioners to carry out the council’s functions or delegating the appointment power (as set out in the committee’s policy).  The committee is responsible for regulatory policy and bylaws.  Where the committee’s powers are recommendatory, the committee or the appointee will provide recommendations to the relevant decision-maker.

 

The committee’s key responsibilities include:

 

·         decision-making (including through a hearings process) under the Resource Management Act 1991 and related legislation

·         hearing and determining objections under the Dog Control Act 1996

·         decision-making under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

·         hearing and determining matters regarding drainage and works on private land under the Local Government Act 1974 and Local Government Act 2002 (this cannot be sub-delegated)

·         hearing and determining matters arising under bylaws

·         appointing independent hearings commissioners to a pool of commissioners who will be available to make decisions on matters as directed by the Regulatory Committee

·         deciding who should make a decision on any particular matter including who should sit as hearings commissioners in any particular hearing

·         monitoring the performance of regulatory decision-making

·         where decisions are appealed or where the committee decides that the council itself should appeal a decision, directing the conduct of any such appeals

·         considering and making recommendations to the Governing Body regarding the regulatory and bylaw delegations (including to Local Boards)

·         recommending bylaws to the Governing Body for consultation and adoption

·         reviewing local board and Auckland water organisation proposed bylaws and making recommendations to the Governing Body

·         appointing panels to hear and deliberate on public feedback related to regulatory policy and bylaw matters

·         deciding regulatory policies that are not otherwise the responsibility of another committee

·         deciding regulatory policies, standards and controls associated with bylaws including those delegated to the former Regulatory and Bylaws Committee, under resolution GB/2012/157 (dogs) and GB/2014/121 (alcohol)

·         receiving local board feedback on bylaw and regulatory policy development and review

·         adopting or amending a policy or policies and making any necessary sub-delegations relating to any of the above areas of responsibility to provide guidance and transparency to those involved.

 

Not all decisions under the Resource Management Act 1991 and other enactments require a hearing to be held and the term “decision-making” is used to encompass a range of decision-making processes including through a hearing.  “Decision-making” includes, but is not limited to, decisions in relation to applications for resource consent, plan changes, notices of requirement, objections, existing use right certificates, certificates of compliance, regulatory policy and bylaws and also includes all necessary related decision-making.

 

In adopting a policy or policies and making any sub-delegations, the committee must ensure that it retains oversight of decision-making and that it provides for councillors to be involved in decision-making in appropriate circumstances.


 

For the avoidance of doubt, these delegations confirm the existing delegations (contained in the chief executive’s Delegations Register) to hearings commissioners and staff relating to decision-making under the RMA and other enactments mentioned below but limits those delegations by requiring them to be exercised as directed by the Regulatory Committee.

 

Relevant legislation includes but is not limited to:

 

All Bylaws

Biosecurity Act 1993

Building Act 2004

Dog Control Act 1996

Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

Gambling Act 2003

Health Act 1956

Land Transport Act 1998

Local Government Act 1974

Local Government Act 2002

Local Government (Auckland Council Act) 2009

Maritime Transport Act 1994

Psychoactive Substances Act 2013

Resource Management Act 1991

Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012

Waste Minimisation Act 2008

 

Related Regulations

 

Powers

 

(i)         All powers necessary to perform the committee’s responsibilities.

Except:

(a)        powers that the Governing Body cannot delegate or has retained to itself (section 2)

(b)        where the committee’s responsibility is limited to making a recommendation only.

(ii)        Power to establish subcommittees.

 

Code of conduct

 

For information relating to Auckland Council’s elected members code of conduct, please refer to this link on the Auckland Council website - https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/about-auckland-council/how-auckland-council-works/elected-members-remuneration-declarations-interest/Pages/elected-members-code-conduct.aspx

 

 

 


Exclusion of the public – who needs to leave the meeting

 

Members of the public

 

All members of the public must leave the meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.

 

Those who are not members of the public

 

General principles

 

·         Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know” basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to perform their role.

·         Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to perform their role.

·         Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.

·         In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.

 

Members of the meeting

 

·         The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the meeting is a committee meeting).

·         However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.

·         All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain, subject to any limitations in standing orders.

 

Independent Māori Statutory Board

 

·         Members of the Independent Māori Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.

·         Independent Māori Statutory Board members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform their role.

 

Staff

 

·         All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior management) remain.

·         Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.

 

Local Board members

 

·         Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed in order to perform their role may remain.  This will usually be if the matter affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.

 

Council Controlled Organisations

 

·         Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled Organisation.

 

 


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        9

2          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   9

3          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               9

4          Petitions                                                                                                                          9  

5          Public Input                                                                                                                    9

6          Local Board Input                                                                                                          9

7          Extraordinary Business                                                                                              10

8          Animal Management Annual Report 2020 - 2021                                                     11

9          Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 12 October 2021                              51

10        Summary of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 12 October 2021                                                                                                                65

11        Objection to stormwater works at 1 Enfield Street, Mount Eden                           77

12        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Apologies

 

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

 

 

2          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.

 

 

3          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 14 September 2021, as a true and correct record.

 

 

4          Petitions

 

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

 

 

5          Public Input

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for Public Input.  Applications to speak must be made to the Governance Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.  A maximum of thirty (30) minutes is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes speaking time for each speaker.

 

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

 

 

6          Local Board Input

 

Standing Order 6.2 provides for Local Board Input.  The Chairperson (or nominee of that Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this time.  The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson) shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to speak.  The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.

 

This right is in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the agenda.

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.


 

 

7          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.”


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

Animal Management Annual Report 2020 - 2021

File No.: CP2021/14751

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To inform the Regulatory Committee about the statutory requirement under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 (the Act) for each territorial authority to report on its dog control policy and practices and to provide specific statistical information.

2.       To provide an update to all stakeholders on the activities and performance of the Auckland Council Animal Management unit.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

Total dogs

3.       The Auckland region has seen a large increase in the number of known dogs, which has gone from 112,530 in the previous year to 118,552 in this year – an increase of 6,022 dogs (5.4% increase).

4.       The Animal Management unit continued to focus on dog registration compliance this year, and this resulted in a 94.8% success rate, which is 0.4% higher than the previous year. This result is seen as a huge achievement for the team, given the current financial challenges that many people face since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Harm caused by dogs

5.       Reducing the number of incidents where dogs cause harm to people and other animals remains the unit’s top priority. The field services teams focussed on high-risk dogs again this year, which has seen an increase in the number of dogs classified as menacing due to their behaviour.

6.       There were 58 fewer attacks on other animals reported this year, but attacks on people increased by 71 cases, which means a rise of 10.4%. In total, the teams investigated 1,585 dog attacks, which is an overall increase of 0.8% from the previous year. In light of the increase in dog numbers in Auckland, this indicates a slight downward trend in aggression-related incidents across the region.

7.       Auckland Council initiated 134 prosecutions during the year against dog owners for serious breaches of the Dog Control Act 1996. There were 20 prosecutions initiated for serious injury caused by a dog, and four of these involved a child victim. A further 11 other prosecutions for dog attacks also involved child victims.

High-risk dogs

8.       At the end of the financial year, there were 4,843 dogs classified as menacing, and 12 dogs were classified as dangerous. This is a 2% increase in menacing dogs, but a 54% decrease in the number of dangerous dogs.

9.       Auckland Council’s Policy on Dogs 2019 requires all menacing and dangerous dogs living in Auckland to be neutered, even if they were classified by another council and that council did not require the dog to be neutered.

10.     Overall compliance with the neutering requirement for all menacing and dangerous dogs is currently at 89.8%, which is 3.4% lower than the previous year. During level 3 and 4 lockdown periods, the council is not actively enforcing this neutering requirement due to the closure of most veterinary clinics, or where veterinary services are restricted to emergencies or urgent procedures only.

 

Field Services teams

11.     Field officers responded to 24,523 requests for service during the year, which is only slightly lower than the previous year. However, this provided the field teams with the opportunity to increase their proactive work relating to beaches, parks, reserves, and other public places.

12.     A total of 7,825 proactive patrols and property visits were completed during the year.

13.     The highest number of service requests still relates to roaming dogs, and the field officers were requested to deal with 7,601 complaints of this nature. The majority (57%) of these complaints were classed as a high priority due to the risk the dogs posed to the public.

14.     In addition to the roaming dogs, field officers also responded to 831 incidents of stock roaming or straying on public roads, and 26 incidents of animals at large on the Auckland motorway network.

Shelter teams

15.     A total of 5,228 dogs were impounded this year in the Auckland animal shelters. This is a decrease of 4.8% from the previous year.

16.     More dogs were successfully returned to their owners this year, which is a great result. A total of 3,728 (71.3%) of all impounded dogs were returned to their owners. The shelters have also seen a 3.7% decrease in euthanasia numbers, which continues the downward trend seen during the last three years.

17.     A total of 328 dogs were adopted from our shelters, which is also another very positive result for the shelter teams.

Specialists team (including Barking Complaints team)

18.     Nuisance barking complaints increased by 7.8% from the previous year – this is believed to be due to the large increase in dog numbers in Auckland, and probably due to more people moving into suburban areas as Auckland continues to grow.

19.     The team of Barking Complaint Advisors and Barking Complaint Investigators responded to 5,929 barking complaints and issued 243 nuisance abatement notices during the year. The Field Services teams actioned a further 334 ongoing or escalated barking complaints where a property visit was required.

20.     The Specialists team completed several projects during the year, including finalising a Memorandum of Understanding with SPCA. A new Dog Rehoming and Fostering policy and a comprehensive Pit Bull Terrier guide were also created by the team.

21.     The Specialists also worked extensively with the Shelter teams to design a new database for the shelters to track all their interactions with the dogs in their care, as well as to provide real-time information on outcomes to field staff.

22.     Several projects involving new technology were initiated to assist the Field Services teams and the Barking Complaints team to provide a more efficient service to all their customers, as well as to reduce operational costs.

Dealing with COVID-19

23.     The Animal Management unit continued to deliver essential services during the various alert levels and lockdowns experienced during the year. Staff health and safety is the highest priority, and all teams have an adequate supply of the appropriate PPE to work safely during the pandemic.

24.     The teams are also continuously monitoring processes and systems as the situation is evolving and are closely following the government’s operational guidelines.

          Community education and training

25.     Due to the restrictions imposed on social events during part of the year, several planned community events were cancelled. However, the unit continued to provide educational advice and training to many organisations that have essential workers or have staff at risk of injury from dog attacks when they have to enter premises.

26.     The Animal Management unit is constantly looking at new ways to do community education and to promote responsible dog ownership. Staff training had to evolve as well, with many internal training programmes now available to staff in an e-learning format.

          Future projects

27.     Animal Management continues to improve processes and work practices in an ever-changing environment. The unit still aims to provide their services at the lowest cost possible, and to find the best possible outcome for all dogs in their care.

28.     Further work is currently being done on working collaboratively with other organisations and with other departments within Auckland Council, with the aim of improving the customer experience for everyone. Part of this project is the upgrading of the council’s dog registration renewal system, as well as the online systems for dog owners to notify the council of any change of ownership or address.

29.     Auckland Council is also currently working on the potential introduction of a ‘tag for life’, which has recently been introduced by several other councils in New Zealand. This will allow the council to issue one permanent dog tag for the life of the dog, which will see a huge decrease in plastic waste material from the 100k+ plastic tags issued every year.

30.     Due to the scope of this project and legislative requirements currently being explored, the project should be completed towards the end of the current financial year.

31.     A targeted initiatives project focussed on reducing the number of high risk or high harm incidents to Aucklanders is currently being developed. The project will have a key focus on reducing the number of dog attacks on people and will involve working with community groups, local marae, Local Board members, schools, and the community, to proactively promote responsible dog ownership and provide education around dog safety.

32.     Auckland Council will continue to work alongside Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority to reduce dog-related harm and nuisance on the 14 maunga across the region, and to promote the historical significance of these precious taonga.

33.     Auckland Council will also undertake a project to actively promote Responsible Dog Owner licensing (RDOL) across the region, with a focus on increasing the percentage per total population of dog owners obtaining an RDOL by the end of the financial year.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)         receive the 2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report.

b)         note that the Animal Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996, and that the report will be published on the Auckland Council website, and a link to the report forwarded to the Department of Internal Affairs.

 

Horopaki

Context

34.     The objective of Animal Management is to keep dogs as a positive part of the life of Aucklanders by:

·    maintaining opportunities for owners to take their dogs into public places,

·    adopting measures to minimise the problems caused by dogs, and

·    protecting dogs from harm and ensuring their welfare.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

35.     Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 (the Act) requires each territorial authority to report on its dog control policy and practices and to provide specific statistical information.

36.     This report acts as a medium for this statutory requirement, and to provide an update to all stakeholders on the activities and performance of the Auckland Council Animal Management unit.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

37.     There is no climate impact arising from the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38.     There are no council group impacts arising from the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39.     There are no local board impacts associated with the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

40.     Auckland Council will continue to work alongside Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority to reduce dog-related harm and nuisance on the 14 maunga across the region, and to promote the historical significance of these precious taonga.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41.     There are no financial impacts resulting from the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021. This report has been reviewed by the Commercial Finance Manager for Regulatory Services.

 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42.     There are no risks or mitigations associated with the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

43.     That the Animal Management Annual Report 2020 – 2021 is received by the committee. Then the report will be published on the Auckland Council website and a link to the report will be forwarded to the Department of Internal Affairs.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Animal Management Annual Report 2020 - 2021

17

      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Christo van der Merwe, Principal Specialist Animal Management

Authorisers

Elly Waitoa, Acting Manager Animal Management

James Hassall - General Manager, Licensing and Regulatory Compliance

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 12 October 2021

File No.: CP2021/14701

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update of all current resource consent appeals lodged with the Environment Court.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This memorandum provides a summary of current resource consent appeals to which the Auckland Council is a party. It updates the report to the Regulatory Committee on 14 September 2021.

3.       If committee members have detailed questions concerning specific appeals, it would be helpful if they could raise them prior to the meeting with Robert Andrews (phone: 09 353-9254) or email: robert.andrews@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz) in the first instance.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      receive the Resource Consents Appeals: Status Report 12 October 2021

 

Horopaki

Context

4.       As at 29 September 2021, there are 29 resource consent appeals to which Auckland Council is a party. These are grouped by Local Board Area geographically from north to south, as set out in Attachment A.  Changes since the last report and new appeals received are shown in bold italic text.

5.       The principal specialist planners - resource consents, continue to resolve these appeals expeditiously. In the period since preparing the previous status report on 3 August 2021, there have been no new appeals lodged and three appeals resolved.

6.       The current Covid19 lockdown continues to see a number of Court hearings and mediations postponed until later in the year. Discussions however continue between various parties to seek resolutions of the appeals where possible.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

7.       To receive the report as provided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

8.       The report provides an update of consent appeals and seeks no resolution or consideration of the merits associated with them.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

9.       Not applicable.

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

Local impacts and local board views

10.     Not applicable.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

11.     The decision requested of the Regulatory Committee is to receive this progress report rather than to consider the relevance to Māori associated with each of the appeals at this time.

12.     The Resource Management Act 1991 includes a number of matters under Part 2, which relate to the relationship of Tangata Whenua to the management of air, land and water resources.  Maori values associated with the land, air and freshwater bodies of the Auckland Region are based on whakapapa and stem from the long social, economic and cultural associations and experiences with such taonga. These matters where relevant are considered with the resolution of the resource consent appeals.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

13.     Environment Court appeal hearings can generate significant costs in terms of commissioning legal counsel and expert witnesses. Informal mediation and negotiation processes seek to limit these costs.  Although it can have budget implications, it is important that Auckland Council, when necessary, ensure that resource consents maintain appropriate environmental outcomes and remain consistent with the statutory plan policy framework through the appeal process.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

14.     Not applicable.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

15.     Not applicable.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Current Resource Consent Appeals as at 29 September 2021

53

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Robert Andrews - Principal Specialist Planning

Authorisers

Ian Smallburn - General Manager Resource Consents

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

Summary of Regulatory Committee Information - updates, memos and briefings - 12 October 2021

File No.: CP2021/12839

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A.

2.       To receive a summary and provide a public record of workshops, memoranda or briefing papers that may have been held or been distributed to Regulatory Committee members.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide public visibility of information circulated to committee members via memo or other means, where no decisions are required.

4.       The following memoranda have been distributed:

Date

Subject

23/9/21

Proposed Auckland Transport Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022

24/9/21

Provisional Local Alcohol Policy - Court of Appeal decision

 

5.       The following workshops have been held:

Date

Subject

29/9/21

Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw

 

6.       These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

at the top left of the page, select meeting/Te hui “Regulatory Committee” from the drop-down tab and click “View”;

under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

7.       Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary. Committee members should direct any questions to the authors.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A of the agenda report.

b)      receive the summary of Regulatory Committee Information – updates, memos and briefings – 12 October 2021.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Forward Work Programme

67

b

Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw Workshop - Notes and Presentation (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Memo - Proposed Auckland Transport Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022 (Under Separate Cover)

 

d

Memo - Provisional Local Alcohol Policy - Court of Appeal decision (Under Separate Cover)

 

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Michelle Judge - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere / Governance Advisor

Authoriser

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

 

Kōmiti Whakahaere ā-Ture / Regulatory Committee
Forward Work Programme 2021

This committee deals with regulatory hearings, appointing independent commissioners and for the development of regulatory policy and bylaws.

The full terms of reference can be found here.

 

Area of work and Lead Department

Reason for work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Expected timeframes

Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2021

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Alcohol Licensing

Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Report on the revenue received and the costs incurred for the alcohol licensing process – required by regulation 19 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013.

Note that the majority of alcohol licensing costs were recovered from the existing default licensing fees regime for the twelve months to 30 June

Confirm continuance of the default licensing fees regime

Review the default licensing fees regime after a suitable period of time has elapsed following the implementation of the Local Alcohol Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animal Management

Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Report on Animal Management activities for the year ending August/Sept 2021as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996

Note:  that the Animal Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 and staff will provide the 2020/2021 report to the Secretary of Local Government

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Animal management Bylaw Review

Community and Social Policy

This Bylaw promotes responsible animal ownership, including minimising impact on neighbours, the public and preventing damage.

 

Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a statement of proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Findings Report 17 March 2020
Link to decision

Options Report 17 November 2020

Link to decision

Decision Report 11 May 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boarding Houses Inspection

Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Update on the Auckland proactive boarding houses inspections programme.

Increase inspections from one to a minimum of three per month focusing on high-risk boarding houses identified from complaint data.

Update:  report to Regulatory Committee and the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Construction Bylaw 2015

Community and Social Policy

Bylaw relates to construction activity on or near public places or infrastructure.

This Bylaw will expire on 29 October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap.

Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Decision report 14 September 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

Objection hearings under section 181 of the Local Government Act

The committee hears and determines objections to proposed stormwater works on private properties pursuant to section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002

Decision on whether the council can proceed with works on the public stormwater network on private land.

Hearings will be undertaken by the committee as the need arises.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Property Maintenance Nuisance Bylaw Review

Community and Social Policy

This Bylaw requires private property to be maintained well enough that doesn't create a nuisance or risk health and safety.

Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.

Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw.  If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Review and Findings Report 1 September 2020

Link to decision

Options report 17 August 2021

Link to decision

Decision report 14 September 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ü

ü

 

 

 

Regional Parks Management Plan Review

Service Strategy and Integration

The process for review of this plan under the Reserves Act 1977 requires hearings to occur after written submissions on the draft plan.

Consultation is due to start in late November 2022 (subject to approval by the PACE Committee), with hearings anticipated to occur in mid-2022.

Decision to appoint hearings commissioners for the Regional Parks Management Plan review.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signage Bylaw Review

Community and Social Policy

This is a joint bylaw with Auckland Transport that regulates promotional signs to ensure public safety and prevent nuisance from poorly maintained or located signage.

Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw.  If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Findings Report 23 June 2020
Link to decision

Options report 13 October 2020

Link to decision

Detailed Options report 20 April 2020

Link to decision

Decision report 17 August 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

Stormwater Bylaw

Healthy Waters / Community and Social Policy

The primary purpose of the Bylaw is to regulate land drainage including to protect, manage and maintain an efficient and effective public stormwater network, as well as the ensure the maintenance and operation of private stormwater systems.

Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Findings Report 28 July 2020
Link to decision

Options Report 16 March 2021

Link to decision

Decision report 17 August 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

Trading and Events Bylaw Review

Community and Social Policy

This Bylaw regulates businesses and events that use public spaces to make sure everyone can use them fairly and safely.

This Bylaw expires on 22 February 2022 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap.

Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

Progress to Date:

Findings Report 13 October 2020

Link to decision

Options Report 16 February 2021

Link to decision

Decision report 11 May 2021

Link to decision

ü

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wharves Bylaw 2015

Community and Social Policy

Bylaw relates to use of council-controlled wharves.

This Bylaw will expire on 29 October 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap.

Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Progress to Date:

Decision Report 14 September 2021

Link to decision

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

Resource Consents Appeal Update

Resource Consents

To provide oversight of the appeals received to resource consent decisions.

Information purposes

Monthly report

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

 

 

 

The Regulatory Services Directorate

Director Regulatory Services

Report on:

·    progress implementing the Food Act 2014

·    insights into the performance, opportunities and risk of the Resources Consents Dept

·    progress implementing the Regulatory Compliance programme

·    transformation activity update

·    building consents and control

·    resource consents and regulatory engineering

For information only:

6 monthly updates

 

Progress to Date:

Provide the Regulatory Committee with an overview and an update on performance, opportunities and risks of Regulatory Services

17 November 2020
Link to PowerPoint presentation

Memo update: Hearings held April 2020 to March 2021

Link to memo

11 May 2021

Link to PowerPoint presentation

 

 

 

 

 

ü

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Completed

Lead Department

Area of work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Decision

Community & Social Policy

Alcohol Control Bylaw review

This Bylaw provides the structure for creating alcohol bans. Individual boards use it to make decisions about local bans.

Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.

Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the Governing Body to amend bylaw.

Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public feedback and local board input.

Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in February 2020.

Finding Report 11 April 2019
Link to decision

Options Report 9 May 2019
Link to decision

Recommendation for Statement of Proposal 1 September 2020
Link to decision

Adopt Statement of Proposal – Governing Body 29 October 2020
Link to decision

Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Animal Management

Report on Animal Management activities for the year ending August/Sept 2020 as required by s10a of the Dog Control Act 1996

Note: that the Animal Management Annual Report is required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 and staff will provide the 2019/2020 report to the Secretary of Local Government

Adopt the 2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report

Link to decision

Link to 2019/2020 Animal Management Annual Report

 

Community and Social Policy

Bylaw Review 2020-22 initiation

Initiation of new bylaw reviews. Includes ‘Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws - Agreed Principles and Processes 2019’

Council has a statutory obligation to periodically review its bylaws.

Decision on the initiation of bylaw reviews that must be completed by October 2022. Report will for each bylaw:

·    set out scope

·    legislative constraints/enablers (if any)

·    relevance to LBs

·    proposed process (including LB involvement)

·    key timeframes

·    public consultation approach

whether a joint working group for early bylaw/policy development is proposed and initiate appointment process if necessary.

Initiation Report 18 February 2020
Link to decision

Community and Social Policy

Cemeteries Bylaw Review (Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014)

This Bylaw and code of practice protects health and safety and minimises potential offensive behaviour.

Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.

Recommend a Statement of Proposal to the Governing Body to amend bylaw.

Appoint Bylaw Panel to make recommendations to the Governing Body on the proposal after hearing and deliberating on public feedback and local board input.

Development of proposal to amend bylaw to commence in February 2020.

Options Report 9 April 2019
Link to decision

Direction Report 9 May 2019
Link to decision

Proposal to amend 1 September 2020
Link to decision

Adopt Statement of Proposal – Governing Body 24 September 2020
Link to decision

Adopt the amended Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014

link to decision

Building Consents

Earthquake Prone, Dangerous & Insanitary Buildings Policy 2011 -2016 Review

2011 - Auckland Council was required under s131 of the Building Act 2004 to adopt a policy on earthquake prone, dangerous and insanitary buildings

2018 – Due to the Building (Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016, Auckland Council’s management of earthquake-prone buildings now falls under the national policy and methodology set by MBIE. Our ongoing work programme for issuing statutory EPB notices, receiving seismic assessments, and identifying residual potential EPBs is being carried out on this basis.

Note that dangerous and insanitary buildings continue to have their own local policy that is now under the management of Regulatory Compliance.

Update:  on the progress made in implementing Auckland Council’s regulatory obligations with regard to earthquake-prone buildings within its jurisdiction.

Approve submission 28 July 2020
Link to decision

Community and Social Policy

Food Bylaw Review

Appoint Bylaw Panel

Decision on bylaw - Due to COVID-19 the decision went to the Governing Body

Adoption 30 April 2020
Link to decision

Community and Social Policy

Freedom Camping

This Bylaw replaces legacy requirements to manage freedom camping in vehicles, under the Freedom Camping Act.

The legacy bylaws expiry on 29 October 2022.

Decision on options to progress a council approach for a Statement of Proposal on freedom camping in vehicles.

Deferred to Governing Body

Community and Social Policy

Gambling Policy Reviews

The Gambling Act 2003 and the Racing Act 2003 (the Acts) regulate gambling in New Zealand.  The Acts require the policies to be reviewed every three years. Auckland Council (Council) first adopted these policies in 2013.

Council reviewed them in 2017, found they were generally effective and retained both with no changes.

Decision: start of the Class 4 Gambling (pokie) Venue Policy and the Racing Board (TAB) Venue Policy reviews in 2020

Council reviewed in 2020, retain both with no changes.

start policy reviews 17 March 2020
Link to decision

findings review 13 October 2020

Link to decision

Community and Social Policy

Navigation Safety Bylaw Review

This Bylaw sets out the rules for all vessels and people using Auckland's waters to ensure their safety.

Council has a statutory obligation to review this Bylaw under the Local Government Act 2002.

Decision on whether a bylaw still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw (findings and options reports).

Findings Report 17 March 2020
Link to decision

Options Report 23 June 2020
Link to decision

Recommend statement of proposal 13 October 2020

link to decision

Adopt statement of proposal – Governing Body – 29 October 2020
Link to decision

Community and Social Policy

Outdoor Fire Safety Bylaw Review

This Bylaw applies to a range of outdoor fire activities, including outdoor cooking and heating fires, sky lanterns, traditional cooking fires, open air fires and incinerator fires.

This Bylaw expires on 18 December 2021 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap.

Findings resulted in decision to revoke bylaw

Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw (findings and options reports).

Findings and Options Report 13 October 2020
Link to decision

Review findings – Governing Body – 29 October 2020
Link to decision

Democracy Services

The Regulatory Committee Policy

The Policy incorporates the operational policy and sub delegations for the decision-making responsibilities that lie within the areas of the committee’s responsibilities.

Review District Licensing Committee (DLC) and Independent Resource Management Act (RMA) commissioner pools.

Decision: adopt the updated Regulatory Committee Policy

Decision: approve the appointment of the District Licensing Committee and the selection process and appointments of independent resource management commissioners for 2021 to 2024.

Recruitment process for DLC Commissioners 12 November 2019 – Governing Body
Link to decision

30 April 2020, due to COVID19 appointment of District Licensing Committee went go to Emergency Committee
Link to decision

Appointment of DLC Committee 30 April 2020
Link to decision

Approval to commence recruitment RMA Commissioners 23 June 2020
Link to decision

Adoption of the Regulatory Committee policy 28 July 2020
Link to decision

Recommendation for the appointment of independent hearings commissioners
Link to decision

Watercare / Community and Social Policy

Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015

This bylaw protects Auckland’s water sources, water supply and wastewater networks from damage, misuse and interference.

This Bylaw will expire on 25 June 2022 and council must (if a bylaw is still necessary) make a new bylaw to avoid a regulatory gap

Decision on whether a bylaw is still need and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

May 2020, due to COVID-19 findings report went to Emergency Committee

Findings Report 28 May 2020-Emergency Committee
Link to decision

Review Options 23 June 2020
Link to decision

Recommendation for Statement of Proposal 16 February 2021

Link to decision

Adopt Statement of Proposal – Governing Body – 25 February 2021

Link to decision

 


 

Kōmiti Whakahaere ā-Ture / Regulatory Committee
Forward Work Programme 2022

This committee deals with regulatory hearings, appointing independent commissioners and for the development of regulatory policy and bylaws.

The full terms of reference can be found here.

 

Area of work and Lead Department

Reason for work

Committee role

(decision and/or direction)

Expected timeframes

Highlight the month(s) this is expected to come to committee in 2022

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Traffic Bylaw Review

Community and Social Policy

This Bylaw regulates the use of vehicles on council-controlled land that is not part of the Auckland transport system, like parks and beaches.

This Bylaw expires on 25 June 2022 and must (if necessary) be replaced to avoid a regulatory gap.

Decision on whether a bylaw is still needed and whether any changes should be made and to confirm, amend, replace or revoke the bylaw. If required, recommend a proposal and appoint a Bylaw Panel.

 

Updated to commence January 2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

Objection to stormwater works at 1 Enfield Street, Mount Eden

File No.: CP2021/13615

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To hear and determine an objection to proposed stormwater works at 1 Enfield Street, Mount Eden pursuant to section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Link Alliance is undertaking stormwater works within the rail corridor on land opposite 1 Enfield Street pursuant to engineering planning approval ENG60361184 – see Attachment A – Engineering Planning Approval.

3.       Part of the works authorised under the engineering planning approval require access to 1 Enfield Street which is owned by One Enfield Limited Partnership.

4.       Pursuant to a private agreement between Link Alliance and the landowner, various stormwater works were undertaken at 1 Enfield Street during 2019 and 2020. These works included diversion of the existing public stormwater network which crossed 1 Enfield Street for the benefit of the new development at 1 Enfield Street. 

5.       In order to complete the stormwater works, Link Alliance needs access to 1 Enfield Street to replace the temporary manhole with a permanent manhole to enable stormwater to flow into the new drainage installed by Link Alliance beneath the rail corridor.

6.       The landowner has refused Link Alliance access to 1 Enfield Street for this purpose.

7.       Council-led efforts to facilitate an agreement between Link Alliance and the landowner have been unsuccessful.

8.       Auckland Council staff have analysed three options for making the connection into the public stormwater network. These included constructing a new manhole on 1 Enfield Street (option one – recommended), utilising existing the existing stormwater network which was due to be abandoned (option two) and constructing new pipe within neighbouring site (1A Enfield Street) to connect into new pipes crossing the rail corridor (option three). 

9.       The options were assessed against various criteria such as impact on development, cost and constructability risk. Option one scored best against these criteria.

10.     After undertaking a site inspection, the council determined that option one – replacing the temporary manhole with a permanent manhole – constitutes necessary public stormwater works. It has issued a notice under section 181(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 informing the landowner of its intention to construct the works as a council project.

11.     The landowner has lodged a written objection to the works (Attachment B) on the grounds that:

·        the Local Government Act notice contained erroneous information and is therefore invalid

·        the proposed works will cause permanent damage and loss of development opportunity at 1 Enfield Street

·        that the council did not consider alternative options for the works.


 

 

12.     If the Regulatory Committee determines that the works should proceed, construction will begin in late November 2021 (weather dependent). The works involve construction of the permanent stormwater manhole to replace the temporary stormwater manhole located on the driveway of 1 Enfield Street. The proposed methodology will cause minimal damage to the driveway which will be reinstated upon completion of the works.

13.     This report recommends that the Regulatory Committee endorse the proposed public stormwater works at 1 Enfield Street to manage stormwater from that property and within the rail corridor adjacent to it.

14.     It has been explained to the affected property owner that it has the right to claim injurious affection (if established) under the Public Works Act 1981.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Regulatory Committee:

a)      hear and determine the objections by the owner of 1 Enfield Street according to clause 1(e) of Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.

b)      resolve that the council will proceed with the construction of a permanent manhole on 1 Enfield Street to enable a connection to be made to the public stormwater network (as shown in Attachment A to the agenda report), according to clause 1(e) of Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Horopaki

Context

15.     Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters department is responsible for managing and maintaining the public stormwater network in Auckland, much of which is located on private land.

16.     Section 181(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 empowers the council to ‘construct works on or under private land or under a building on private land that it considers necessary for sewage and stormwater drainage’.

17.     Such works require either the prior written consent of the owner of the land, or that the council follows the process set out in Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002.

18.     Schedule 12 requires that affected owners and occupiers are provided with a description of the proposed works, including plans, and are given the opportunity to object to the works within one month of notification.

19.     If an objection is made, a hearing must be arranged. After hearing objections, the council must then determine to either abandon the works proposed, or proceed with the works proposed, with or without any alterations that the council thinks fit.

Enabling stormwater management within the rail corridor

20.     Link Alliance, a consortium of companies established to construct railway infrastructure for City Rail Link Limited, is undertaking stormwater works in the rail corridor on land opposite 1 Enfield Street in accordance with engineering planning approval ENG60361184 (see Attachment A).

21.     Part of the works authorised under the engineering planning approval requires access to 1 Enfield Street. 


 

 

22.     Pursuant to a private agreement between Link Alliance and the landowner, various stormwater works were undertaken 1 Enfield Street. These works included diversion of the existing public stormwater network which crossed 1 Enfield Street and the construction of temporary manhole for the benefit of the new development the landowner was undertaking at 1 Enfield Street.

23.     Installation of the temporary manhole allowed the removal of the existing drainage located beneath 1 Enfield Street, allowing construction of the development to commence. Link Alliance agreed to the existing drainage works being varied on the grounds that Link Alliance’s works could accommodate such a change, and the parties worked together to coordinate their engineering plans to complement each other’s programme of works.

24.     In order to complete the stormwater works in accordance with its approved plans, Link Alliance needs access to 1 Enfield Street to replace the temporary manhole that is located on 1 Enfield Street’s driveway with a permanent manhole. This new permanent manhole will enable stormwater to flow into the new drainage installed by Link Alliance beneath the rail corridor and to connect to the stormwater shaft constructed on the northern side of the rail corridor.

25.     Minor excavation works would be undertaken around the outside of the manhole which would be fully reinstated upon completion of the works. The work is expected to take 14 days.

26.     The landowner has refused Link Alliance access to 1 Enfield Street for this purpose.

27.     Link Alliance approached the council, as the eventual asset owner of the manhole, in July 2021 to provide facilitation services. 

28.     The council undertook a site investigation, considered alternative options (which are detailed further in Attachment D of this report) and confirmed its preference for the manhole to be constructed in accordance with the approved engineering plans. This analysis was made available to the landowner.

29.     Once the connection is made to the stormwater network, the new manhole will be vested in Auckland Council as a public stormwater asset to be owned and maintained by Healthy Waters.

Objections received from landowners at 1 Enfield Street

30.     The owner of 1 Enfield Street has refused to allow Link Alliance access to its property to replace the temporary manhole with a permanent manhole. Link Alliance applied to the council to provide facilitation services to help reach an agreement with the landowner.

31.     Facilitation sessions commenced in July 2021, however no agreement was reached. The council then analysed the proposed works (as detailed below) and determined that they are necessary public works, and that the council would undertake the works itself as a council project under the powers of the Local Government Act 2002. This enables public works to be undertaken on private land without the owner’s consent, provided the requirements of the Act are met.

32.     The council issued a notice of their intention to construct the works to the affected landowners under section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002 on 20 August 2021 – see Attachment C – section 181 notice.

33.     Following the issue of this notice, the council has continued to communicate with the landowners, however it has not been possible to reach an agreement.

34.     Pursuant to schedule 12 of the Local Government Act 2002, the landowners had until 20 September 2021 to formally object to the section 181 notice. On 20 September 2021 an objection was received.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

35.     Section 181 of the Local Government Act 2002 empowers the council to construct works on private land that it considers necessary for stormwater drainage. When determining whether works are necessary, the council looks at a range of possibilities to achieve the required stormwater outcomes for the public good, and at the same time, carefully balances any impacts on individual property owners.

36.     In this case, the council analysed three alternative alignments to enable a connection to be made to the public stormwater network. These options were:

·        option one: construct a permanent manhole to connect into rail corridor pipes (recommended option)

·        option two: utilise existing stormwater network

·        option three: construct new pipe within 1A Enfield Street to connect into rail corridor pipes.

37.     The three options were analysed against relevant criteria as shown in Attachment D – options analysis.    

Analysing options for stormwater management in the rail corridor

38.     Option two is not supported as this route does not provide a long term solution to manage stormwater beyond July 2022 and would render infrastructure already constructed to manage stormwater redundant. In order to be a permanent solution, the existing pipes would need to be re-laid at a deeper level and a new pump station constructed to tie into the downstream stormwater network. This option also involves high operational and maintenance costs.

39.     Option three would avoid a manhole on 1 Enfield Street, but carries a high construction risk as it is unlikely that a manhole would achieve the required clearance to be built in the rail corridor. This option would also duplicate existing stormwater infrastructure.

40.     The council also considered a fourth option – do nothing. This would involve the council walking away from the situation and leaving Link Alliance to continue to negotiate with the landowner. This option is not supported, as it means Link Alliance is likely to pursue option two. As described above, this option would mean the council inherits surplus stormwater infrastructure which it has to maintain as part of the public network and which only provides a temporary solution to manage stormwater within the rail corridor and beyond. 

41.     As demonstrated by the weightings set out Attachment D – options analysis, option one is the preferred option for the following reasons:

·        infrastructure already exists which provides for the most efficient way for stormwater to be managed

·        the location of the work will not affect any structures, resulting in minimal disturbance within 1 Enfield Street

·        pursuing alternative options would involve greater cost and duplicate the existing network

·        the works cannot be reasonably accommodated on public land

·        the solution is consistent with Link Alliance plans for managing stormwater in the rail network in the most efficient way possible and with engineering approved plans

·        it will cause the least disruption to the rail network and private landowners

·        the pipe network has been designed to cater for the 10 per cent annual exceedance probability (the probability of a flood event occurring in any year), including allowance for climate change 

·        the work has been designed in accordance with Auckland Council standards and its installation will enable development to take place in surrounding areas.

Negotiating with the landowners

42.     Negotiations with the landowner have been ongoing since early 2020. Initially negotiations were held directly between Link Alliance and the landowner, with the council becoming involved from July 2021 onwards.

43.     The council has attempted to engage with the landowner to offer advice on the proposed works and broker an agreement. To date an agreement for access has not been reached.

Summary of objections received

44.     Table 1 details the grounds upon which the landowner objects to the works and Healthy Waters response.

Table 1. Summary of objections

Objection points

Response from Healthy Waters

 

That the s.181 Local Government Act notice issued to the landowner is defective because it referred to section 63 of the Public Works Act 1981

·    The notice served meets the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 and the inclusion of a reference to the Public Works Act does not invalidate the notice.

·    Section 181(6) does enable compensation for injurious affection to land, however that is a separate process that does not prevent proceeding through the section 181 and Schedule 12 process or hold up a determination under that section.

That the proposed works will cause permanent damage and loss of development opportunity at 1 Enfield Street

·    The manhole already exists and is simply being upgraded.

·    The area affected by the works is a concrete driveway near the boundary of 1 Enfield Street which is not land which could be used for any other purpose. There is also an existing access agreement between the landowner and Auckland Transport for this area (see Attachment E - access agreement).

·    The residential development is far enough from the works that it is extremely unlikely that it would be impacted.

·    The proposed methodology will cause minimal damage to the driveway which will be reinstated upon completion of the works. There will be no permanent damage to 1 Enfield Street.

That the council failed to consider alternative options and share those findings with the landowner

See Attachment D – options analysis. Staff have assessed the preferred option as being the most efficient alignment in terms of stormwater management. This analysis was made available to the landowner.

Recommended stormwater management option

45.     Staff recommend that construction of the proposed stormwater works proceed at 1 Enfield Street as per option one in this report.

46.     The works are necessary to manage stormwater flow from 1 Enfield Street and within the rail corridor. Works are expected to take up to 14 days to complete, and staff will work with the landowners to ensure minimal disruption occurs.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

47.     Auckland Council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan on 21 July 2020. Some of the key elements of the plan include how we will adapt to climate change, taking a precautionary approach and preparing for our current emissions pathway and the prospect of a 3.5 degrees warmer region.

48.     One of the expected consequences of rising global temperatures is increased and more intense rainfall. To contribute to increasing Auckland’s resilience to climate change, the Auckland Council Stormwater Code of Practice requires all new infrastructure to be designed to deal with these expected impacts and severe weather events.

49.     The pipes in the rail corridor which are to connect into the manhole on 1 Enfield Street have been designed to cater for 10 percent annual exceedance probability (1 in 10-year average recurrence interval) storm events, including allowance for climate change. This has the effect of making the network more resilient to storm events and reducing the likelihood of flooding of properties.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

50.     Watercare and Auckland Transport assets will not be impacted by the proposed works if option one is undertaken.

51.     The manhole once constructed will be vested in the council and will form part of the public stormwater network to be maintained by Healthy Waters.

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

Local impacts and local board views

52.     The Albert-Eden Local Board has not been consulted on the proposed stormwater works, as the pipe will be constructed on private land.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

53.     The developer has not consulted local iwi on the proposed stormwater works outlined in this report.

54.     Council staff notified iwi representatives of the proposed project through Healthy Water’s monthly email of all active Healthy Waters projects. Iwi representatives were asked to signal whether they would like to be engaged on this project, however, no feedback has been received from iwi to date.

55.     Improved water quality for Tāmaki Makaurau is a priority for mana whenua. The recommended option will contribute to a better functioning stormwater management system, reducing the impact of the development on water quality.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56.     The recommended option is the most cost effective for the council. If approved, the manhole will be constructed by the council, with costs of the works to be paid for by Link Alliance upfront. 

57.     The council will be responsible for any proven injurious affection to private land pursuant to section 181(6) of the Local Government Act 2002, and the Public Works Act 1981.

 

 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58.     Staff have undertaken a systematic risk assessment. Key risks and proposed mitigations relating to the endorsement of option one are shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Risks and mitigations arising from option one

Risk

Mitigation

Financial risk – if the landowner appeals the Regulatory Committee’s decision, the council may become liable for the cost of defending a District Court case.

Given that the Regulatory Committee and District Court’s decision-making discretion is limited only to questions of the works being necessary and compliance with legal process, and not matters of compensation, it is considered unlikely that an appeal would be brought. Even if it was, the risk of the council losing on appeal is considered low, due to the works being necessary, and the section 181 process being followed correctly. If the landowner is unsuccessful in any legal challenge, they may be liable to pay court costs.

The landowner could seek injurious affection (if evidenced) through the Land Valuation Tribunal, arguing that the public works have reduced the value of their property.

Claims for injurious affection are dealt with in a separate process under the Public Works Act 1981.

Infrastructure risk – low quality assets being vested to the council.

The works will be undertaken by an approved council contractor who will have in place sufficient insurances to cover the risk of failure.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59.     If the Regulatory Committee determines to proceed with the project (under Schedule 12 clause 1(e)(ii)), the next step will be to notify the landowner in writing of the council’s intention to proceed with the works. The work is proposed to be undertaken in November 2021.

60.     The landowner has up to 14 days to lodge a further appeal to the District Court. If this occurs, then the council’s Legal Services team will support this process. If no appeal is lodged, the council would look to proceed with the works in late 2021.

 


 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Engineering planning approval

87

b

Objection letter

89

c

Section 181 Local Government Act notice

91

d

Options analysis

103

e

Access agreement

107

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Leigh Steckler - Senior Commercial Negotiator, Healthy Waters

Shaun McAuley - Commercial Partnerships Team Leader, Healthy Waters

Authorisers

Craig Mcilroy - General Manager Healthy Waters

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

 

 

 



Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 



Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator




PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator





PDF Creator


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Regulatory Committee

12 October 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator