Agenda of Hibiscus and Bays Local Board - Thursday, 17 February 2022

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Notice of Motion	9
b ⇩	Supporting information	11

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Assignment of Lease and approval to transfer assets from Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated to Torbay Community Association Incorporated and renewal of lease to Torbay Community Association at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay

File No.: CP2021/19808

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To allow the Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated (seniors club) to assign their current lease and grant landlord approval to transfer their assets to Torbay Community Association Incorporated.

2. To grant a renewal of the community lease to Torbay Community Association Incorporated (Association) at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated owns and manages the Torbay Senior Citizens Club Hall at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay in terms of a community lease which expired on 31 October 2018. The lease has provisions for one 33 year right of renewal with final expiry on 31 October 2051.

4. The initial term expired on 31 October 2018 and is currently rolling over on a month-by-month basis.

5. The seniors club has been operating from the premises since November 1985. Their numbers have dwindled, and the group is being wound up.

6. Staff workshopped the issue of the seniors club wanting to terminate their lease and steps forward in February 2019.

7. Staff took Expressions of Interest in December 2019. A total of two groups applied and staff recommended to the local board at an early 2020 workshop that the association be chosen as the successful candidate.

8. The seniors club requests council’s approval to assign their lease and approval to transfer ownership of their assets situated at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay, to the Torbay Community Association Incorporated.

9. The association have submitted an application to renew the proposed assigned lease as per provisions of the original lease.

10. This report recommends that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board approves the assignment of lease, transfer of assets from Torbay Senior Citizens Incorporated to Torbay Community Association Incorporated and grants a renewal to Torbay Community Association Incorporated.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approve the assignment of lease from Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated to Torbay Community Association Incorporated, on the same terms and conditions.

b) grant landlord approval to transfer Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated’s assets to Torbay Community Association Incorporated.

c) grant a community ground lease renewal to Torbay Community Association Incorporated for 33 years effecting final expiry 31 October 2051 and note all other terms and condition will be in accordance with the original lease agreement dated 1 November 1985.

Horopaki

Context

Land and Buildings and Lease

11. The land is legally described as Lot 1 DP 88189 held in in Certificate of title NA45C/1119. The land is owned by Auckland Council and classified as Local Purpose (Community Facilities) Reserve, subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

12. The seniors hold a community ground lease for its building of 275 square metres (more or less) situated at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay.

13. The lease commenced on 1 November 1985 for a term of 33 years and provides for one right of renewal of 33 years, effecting final expiry on 1 October 2051.

14. The Torbay Senior Citizens Club Hall has been run by the seniors for the past 33 years. The hall has reached a point where it needs refurbishment and a more dedicated centre management team.

15. The building was assessed and found that some damaged weatherboards need to be repaired and replaced and penetrations from waste pipe to weatherboard cladding need to be sealed. The interior requires that the corners and edges of the vinyl floor lining is sealed to prevent any surface water from getting under the floor.

16. To this end, Torbay Community Association Incorporated have applied to take on ownership of the hall and Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated and take on the recommended repairs.

The Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated

17. Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated holds an operative community lease for their building situated at Watea Road Reserve, R33 Watea Road, Torbay.

18. The charitable objects of the seniors were to provide, maintain and manage a community centre for social, cultural, and other useful activities for the senior citizens of Torbay.

19. Over the past 33 years, the seniors have carried out and achieved its objectives.

20. It became clear that a more dedicated administration structure was required to provide for the halls future maintenance and management as some damaged weatherboards need to be repaired and replaced and penetrations from waste pipe to weatherboard cladding need to be sealed. The interior requires that the corners and edges of the vinyl floor lining is sealed to prevent any surface water from getting under the floor.

21. In terms of the lease, and as per the seniors’ constitution, approval from council is required.

22. An advert calling for expressions of interests for R33 Watea Road Torbay was placed in the North Shore Times. There were two interested groups, Torbay Community Association Incorporated and Kyu Shid Do Akido.

23. Input was received from the Strategic Broker, Active Recreation Lead and Senior Land Use Advisor. On strength of their recommendations, Torbay Community Association Incorporated was preferred.

24. The local board was informed of this decision during a workshop on 25 November 2021.

25. In light of the association’s success, the trustees of seniors have resolved to wind up the trust, assign their lease and transfer their building to the association.

26. Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated trust deed states that:

should the trust dissolve or be wound up then any assets shall be distributed and transferred to Council or such other charitable body as Council, in its discretion, may determine.

Torbay Community Association Incorporated

27. Torbay Community Association Incorporated and Kyu Shid Do Akido applied via the EOI process. The applications were assessed, and Torbay Community Association Incorporated was the preferred applicant.

28. The association has been operating, in the Torbay area since 1943 where it has been providing a hub for the community by running a community hall at 35 Watea Road, Torbay for wider community groups.

29. The association currently run the adjacent Torbay Community Hall and believe it can extend access to the community of Torbay by having the additional space.

30. The association provides a space for the Torbay community to deliver programmes, events, and projects.

31. The association is aware and has identified that the facility needs a major refurbishment and that an asset management plan needs to be put in place. They also intend to seek grants to undertake the works needed.

32. The association intends to ensure that the centre fulfills its original intent, meeting the needs of the residents of Torbay.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

33. Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 sets out the requirements for community occupancy agreements.

34. Torbay Community Association Incorporated proposes to take over ownership of the facility, manage it in line with the permitted use as stipulated in the occupancy agreement and in accordance with the land classification.

35. The lease will continue in its current form, for the same purpose and subject to the same conditions; the assignment will transfer the contractual rights of Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated to Torbay Community Association Incorporated. There is no significant departure expected from the current land use.

36. The current lease, to be assigned, expired on 31 October 2018, with one right of renewal remaining. Any future occupancy arrangements will be assessed against the community occupancy guidelines in force at time of final expiry.

37. Staff have assessed the proposed assignment of the operative lease and subsequent renewal to the association. The association meets the criteria for a community lease as evidenced below:

i. it is a registered incorporated society

ii. it has a history of delivering quality services to the local community

iii. the association has provided a copy of its financial accounts which indicate that its funds are sufficient to meets its liabilities and that it possesses adequate financial reserves

iv. the association is managed appropriately as evidenced by its longevity as well as its considered approach to facilities management.

38. In addition to the assignment of the operative lease, the seniors propose to transfer its assets, which includes its building, to the association, if the lease is successfully assigned to the association.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

39. It is anticipated that continued activation of the site will not result in an increase of greenhouse gas emission.

40. To improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts, Community Outcomes Plans advocate that the lease holder:

· use sustainable waste, energy and water efficiency systems

· use eco labelled products and services

· seek opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from lease-related activities.

41. Asset improvements and maintenance undertaken by the lease holder will strive for maximum re-use and recycling of existing material. This will be in alignment with the waste management hierarchy (prevention, reduction, recycle) to ensure minimum impact on greenhouse gas emission.

42. All measures taken are aimed at meeting council’s climate goals, as set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, which are:

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

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

43. Climate change has an unlikely potential to impact the lease as no part of the leased area is in a flood-sensitive or coastal inundation zone.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

44. Advice was received from the Strategic Broker, Active Recreation Lead and Senior Land Use Advisor who support the report’s recommendations. The proposed lease assignment, asset transfer and renewal of lease has no identified impacts on other parts of the council group.

45. The views of other council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

46. The proposed lease will benefit the community by enabling initiatives that promote a connected community in the way of a community space for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area and its surrounding communities.

47. The delivered activities align with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020 outcome A connected community: We work closely with our community partners to ensure our local facilities are vibrant places for people to meet, get involved and be inspired.

48. The recommendations within this report fall within the local board’s allocated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

49. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its statutory obligations and relationship commitments to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context.

50. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2018-2028, the Unitary Plan, and individual local board plans.

51. Support for Māori initiatives and outcomes are detailed in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework. Community leasing aims to increase Māori wellbeing through targeted support for Māori community development projects.

52. Community leases support a wide range of activities and groups. Leases are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interests, and priorities. The activities and services provided by leaseholders create benefits for many local communities, including Māori.

53. There are no changes to the use or operational activities being conducted on the land as such and staff did not engage with iwi over the lease transfer.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

54. All costs relating to the advertisement of the council’s intention to grant the proposed lease and preparation of the lease agreements are borne by the Community Facilities department of Auckland Council.

55. There are no cost implications to the local board approving the assignment of lease and transfer of assets from Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated to Torbay Community Association Incorporated followed by the renewal lease.

56. Ongoing maintenance is covered by lessee. These lessee costs are covered by rental income, donations and carpark contributions.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

57. Should the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolve not to assign the lease and grant approval to transfer the assets from Torbay Senior Citizens Club Incorporated to Torbay Community Association, this decision will materially affect the Torbay Community Association Incorporated’s ability to undertake its core activities at the Torbay Senior Citizens Hall.

58. Additionally, there is a risk of the assets passing to the council under the Property Law Act 2007 with the council liable for an asset that it has no budget for and is not contemplated in the Long-Term Plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59. Subject to the approval of the lease assignment, transfer of assets, and renewal of lease, council staff will work with the groups to finalise the lease documentation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A Torbay Senior Citizens Club Site Plan	21

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tania Seale – Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Community Facilities

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Variation of the current community lease agreement to Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated for land on which its existing clubroom is located at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway

File No.: CP2022/00393

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the local board to vary the current community lease agreement to Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated for land on which its existing clubroom is located at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve. The purpose of the variation will be to provide that the lease may potentially expire earlier, being 12 months from completion of the club’s proposed new development adjacent to the existing clubroom, and to require the club to remove its existing clubroom and remediate the subject land prior to the lease expiring.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its business meeting of 2 December 2021, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved to grant the club a new agreement to lease and lease to Orewa Surf Life Saving Club. The purpose of this was to enable the club to fundraise, seek and obtain consents and construct its new development on Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway (resolution number HB/2021/153).

3. The club’s proposed new development will be constructed adjacent to and further inland from its existing clubroom, over which a current lease agreement is in place.

4. On drafting the required documentation for the proposed new development, council’s legal team recommended that the lease agreement for the club’s existing clubroom should be varied.

5. The purpose of the variation will be to provide that the lease will potentially expire earlier than 12 months from completion of the club’s proposed new development. The variation will also require the club to remove its existing clubroom and remediate the subject land prior to the lease expiring.

6. This report recommends that the local board approves a variation to the club’s current community lease for its existing clubroom to include an early termination clause.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approve a variation to the lease agreement between the former Rodney District Council and Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated (relating to the land on which the club’s existing clubroom is located legally described as Part Allotment 319 Waiwera Parish, defined by Survey Office Plan 22295 at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway) dated 12 March 2008 and the subsequent renewal of lease document between both parties dated 18 November 2016 as follows:

i) amend the final expiry date so that the lease will expire on the earlier date of 29 November 2027 (being the existing final expiry date) and the date which is 12 months from completion of the club’s proposed new development adjacent to the existing clubroom; and

ii) provide that the club must remove its existing clubroom (and all associated improvements) and remediate the subject land prior to such final expiry date.

Horopaki

Context

7. This report considers the leasing matters with respect to Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated occupation of land at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, Orewa.

8. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board is the delegated authority relating to local, recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing and landowner decisions.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Land

9. The club occupies land at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway legally described as Part Allotment 319 Waiwera Parish, defined by Survey Office Plan 22295.

10. Part Allotment 319 Waiwera Parish forms part of the Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve and is held by the Crown through the Department of Conservation as a classified recreation reserve. It is currently vested in council, in trust for recreation purposes. The club’s activities comply with the land classification under the Reserves Act 1977.

Lease agreement for existing clubroom and requirement for variation

11. In 2007 the former Rodney District Council granted Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated a new lease for land on which the club’s existing clubroom at Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway) is located. The lease commenced 1 December 2007 for an initial term of 10 years and provided for one right of renewal for 10 years, expiring 29 November 2027.

12. In 2016, the club applied to exercise its right of renewal provided for under the terms of the lease. At its business meeting of 7 September 2016, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved to grant the club a renewal of its lease (resolution number HB/2016/161(e)).

13. At its business meeting of 2 December 2021, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved to grant the club a new agreement to lease. The purpose of this was to enable the club to fundraise, seek and obtain consents and construct its development adjacent to and further inland from its existing clubroom (resolution number HB/2021/153).

14. Council’s legal team, on drafting the required documentation for the proposed new development, recommended a variation to the current lease agreement for the club’s existing clubroom. The purpose of the variation will be to provide that the lease may potentially expire earlier, being 12 months from completion of the club’s proposed new development adjacent to the existing clubroom, and to require the club to remove its existing clubroom and remediate the subject land prior to the lease expiring.

15. The current lease for the existing clubroom does not expire until 29 November 2027. It may be that the club completes its proposed new development well prior to the current date of expiry. If so, this variation will ensure the club removes the clubroom and reinstate the land within 12 months of completion.

Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated

16. The Orewa Surf Life Saving Club Incorporated has occupied part of Orewa Reserve since 1950, with various additions and renovations being made to its existing building in the 1970s and 1990s.

17. Current club membership exceeds 1000 and spans all age groups. Main activities include training for active lifeguards as well as volunteering, recreational and social opportunities for members and guests.

18. As stated by its constitution, the club’s primary objectives are:

· “promote, develop and deliver surf lifesaving as a charitable service and prevent drowning and injury of those swimming and undertaking activities at beaches and other aquatic environments by providing lifesaving, patrol services and other programmes and services at Orewa Beach and at other locations as determined by the Club for the safety and recreation of the general public.”

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Plan sets out two core goals:

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

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

20. As the variation relates to the removal of the club’s existing clubroom and reinstatement of the subject land on the reserve, there will be minimal impact on climate change caused by greenhouse emissions (a resource consent will be required for the works).

21. Similarly, climate change has the potential to impact the existing clubroom long-term, as the lease site sits within a coastal hazard zone.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. Leasing staff has liaised with council’s legal team and wider colleagues in parks, sports and recreation about the variation to the club’s current lease agreement for its existing building. Legal and parks colleagues are supportive of the variation.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. At its business meeting of 2 December 2021, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved to grant the club a new agreement to lease. The purpose of this was to enable the club to fundraise, seek and obtain consents and construct its new facility on Orewa Domain Recreation Reserve, 275 Hibiscus Coast Highway (resolution number HB/2021/153).

24. A variation to the club’s current lease agreement for its existing clubroom as described above will legally require it to remove the clubroom, associated improvements and reinstate the land.

25. Removal of the club’s current clubroom along with reinstatement of the subject land supports outcome four in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020:

· Outcome 4 – open spaces to enjoy “our communities enjoy access to quality parks, reserves, beaches and facilities for leisure, sport and recreation”.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi which are outlined in council’s key strategic planning documents; the Auckland Plan, the Long Term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, and local board plans.

27. Specific to this matter, leasing staff have not engaged with mana whenua identified as having an interest in land within the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board geographical area. As a condition of the club’s proposed new development, the club will be required to engage with mana whenua. Council staff will work alongside the club to undertake this requirement.

28. As the removal of the existing clubroom will, in essence, be included in the club’s overall development works, leasing staff will ensure that this component will be included in the information shared with mana whenua representatives, during engagement.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. There is no direct cost to council associated with the variation of the club’s current lease for its existing clubroom. The club will be responsible for all costs involved with removal and reinstatement of the land.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. Staff recommends that the local board resolve to approve the variation to the club’s lease agreement to provide that the lease may potentially expire earlier, being 12 months from completion of the club’s proposed new development adjacent to the existing clubroom, and to require the club to remove its existing clubroom and remediate the subject land prior to the lease expiring.

31. Should the local board resolve not to approve the variation to the club’s lease agreement, contractually, council as landlord cannot compel the club to do so prior to 29 November 2021. There will also be doubt as to the club’s obligations in respect of the existing clubroom upon eventual expiry, and its ownership.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. Subject to the local board approving the variation to the club’s current lease for its existing building, council staff will work with the club to finalise the documents.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Karen Walby - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Shoreline Adaptation Plan: Whangaparāoa Pilot Report

File No.: CP2022/00017

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board endorsement for the Shoreline Adaptation Plan - Whangaparāoa Pilot Report (Attachment A to the agenda report).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Shoreline Adaptation Plans are being developed across Auckland to provide a long-term adaptation strategy for council-owned land and assets in response to the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change (including sea-level rise).

3. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme commenced in February 2021 with the development of the Whangaparāoa pilot.

4. Community engagement on the Whangaparāoa pilot started in late-March 2021 and closed mid-July 2021. The pilot included both digital and in-person engagements to identify community values and objectives to support the development of adaptation strategies.

5. Mana whenua engagement with local iwi started in late-March 2021 and was completed in October 2021. During the series of seven hui, Ngāti Manuhiri and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki provided three specific themes related to shoreline management: Whakapapa (Ancestry), Taiao (Environment) and Tangata Hononga (Connecting People). These themes helped guide the development of adaptation strategies.

6. The Whangaparāoa coast was divided into 35 discrete coastal sections. By aligning the results of the technical coastal hazards exposure assessment with local iwi feedback, infrastructure and community objectives, a series of adaptation strategies were developed across the short, medium and long-term. Strategies include ‘Hold the Line’, ‘Limited Intervention’, ‘No Active Intervention’ and ‘Managed Realignment’.

7. Most of Whangaparāoa’s shoreline areas can be managed over the next 100 years with limited to no active intervention.

8. For some of the low-lying shoreline areas, the escalating risk of coastal inundation and rainfall flooding will require managed realignment of assets in the medium or long-term. The need to setback assets out of the areas susceptible to coastal erosion and instability, where possible, has also been signaled.

9. The development of shoreline adaptation plans, such as this pilot, is funded through the Long-term Plan as part of the climate action investment package. However, the reports do not commit council to any additional investment and no financial investment decisions have been made through this pilot.

10. Implementation of the adaptation strategies recommended in the Whangaparāoa Shoreline Adaptation Plan requires integration into relevant council documents and plans including Asset Management Plans. Alongside monitoring of coastal assets and the surrounding coastal environment, this will help to inform the appropriate maintenance and renewal of assets through the corresponding work programmes through a collaborative effort across Auckland Council departments.

11. In November and December 2021, two hui were held with Ngāti Manuhiri governance to discuss how the Shoreline Adaptation Plan aligns with Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri and Māori Outcomes. Additional information was added to the report to reflect these hui.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) endorse the Whangaparāoa Pilot Shoreline Adaptation Plan.

Horopaki

Context

12. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan (SAP) work programme is focused on how we can adapt Auckland Council-owned land and assets to the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change over time. The programme is led by the Resilient Land & Coasts department and is developed collaboratively across Auckland Council including council-controlled organisations, Auckland Transport and Watercare.

13. The programme launched in February 2021 with a pilot study across Whangaparāoa Peninsula. This area was selected for its diverse coastline, the portfolio of council-owned land and assets, and their exposure to coastal hazards and climate change impacts.

14. Development of the pilot has included engagement with mana whenua, the local community and relevant infrastructure providers. This has identified specific values and objectives for shoreline management of Whangaparāoa. In combination with the technical results of a coastal hazards exposure assessment, these objectives were used to determine a series of shoreline adaptation strategies.

15. The strategies provide high-level guidance on how coastal areas can be adapted over time to sustainably manage the escalating impacts of coastal hazards and climate change. Strategies include:

· No Active Intervention: allow natural processes and evolution of the coast to continue. This includes no investment in the provision or maintenance of any coastal defences.

· Limited Intervention: acknowledges that the coastline’s position will not be fixed into the future and may include limited work to extend existing asset life and small-scale nature-based measures (like dune planting).

· Hold the Line: maintain the coastal edge at a fixed location, using nature-based options (like beach nourishment) or hard structures (like sea walls).

· Managed Realignment: assets and activities are moved away from hazard-prone areas in a controlled way over time. Managed realignment allows greater space for natural buffers and reduces asset exposure to natural hazards.

16. The process of developing the pilot and resulting recommendations of the Shoreline Adaptation Plan are further discussed below.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Whangaparāoa coastal hazard exposure assessment

17. An assessment of Whangaparāoa’s exposure to coastal hazards (including coastal inundation, coastal erosion, and rainfall flooding) and future climate change impacts was completed across the short (20-year), medium (60-year) and long (100-year) term. The results of the assessment are summarised in Attachment B (to the agenda report).

18. The assessment indicates that council-owned land and assets, including cultural heritage sites, across the peninsula typically have low exposure to coastal hazards in the short-term. This provides time to respond and adapt to longer term changes. In the long-term, the most significant impact is related to the potential erosion of coastal land and its associated impacts on infrastructure. Coastal inundation and rainfall flooding will be exacerbated by the long-term impacts of climate change, increasing the magnitude and frequency of flood events and their impact on low-lying areas.

19. The results were used to inform discussions of the changing coastal environment with local iwi, infrastructure providers (Community Facilities, Healthy Waters, Auckland Transport and Watercare), amenity and open space specialists (Parks, Sports, and Recreation, Community Facilities) and the local community.

Community engagement – local input to local issues

20. Community engagement on the pilot started in late-March and closed mid-July 2021. A combination of approaches to community engagement have been trialed, including:

· three interactive public presentations that were also livestreamed to YouTube and recorded for future reference. Presentations introduced the work programme and key concepts including coastal hazards, climate change and adaptation options

· two public open days following the initial public presentations and at completion of the draft adaptation strategies for community feedback

· digital engagement through ‘AK Have Your Say’ and ‘Social Pinpoint’. The latter enabled the community to access an online interactive map to drop ‘pins’ identifying and commenting on areas they valued, and complete short surveys for specific areas

· establishment of a Community Reference Group (CRG) for focused workshops and discussions. The CRG included ten community members between 25 and 70 years of age from a variety of backgrounds (including representatives from a range of recreational and community groups), supported by two members of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board.

21. The Social Pinpoint map was open for feedback between March and July 2021 and identified over 580 unique users. Community feedback from the ‘AK Have Your Say’ page included 219 comments and 316 survey responses.

22. All feedback was collated and sorted, and generally fell into six major categories: active recreation, passive recreation, environmental, community connection, transport, and maintenance issues. Comments and input related to the first four categories were used to develop the community objectives for the Shoreline Adaptation Plan. Feedback related to transport and maintenance issues were forwarded to the relevant departments.

23. With the support of the community reference group, the data collected via Social Pinpoint was collated into high level objectives that capture the values of the local community. These objectives were used to guide the development of the adaptation strategies:

· Preserve and enhance the natural environment and ecosystems that support biodiversity

· Use natural and nature-based solutions to increase the resilience of coastal systems where practicable

· Provide diverse recreation options within the Whangaparāoa park and open space network

· Provide safe access to the Coastal Marine Area for a range of water-based activities on the northern and southern side of the peninsula (e.g, swimming, sailing/boating, kiteboarding and surfing)

· Have accessible places within reserves where people can enjoy the coastal environment in its natural setting

· Shoreline management options provide added benefits to amenity and coastal access

· Auckland Council to identify opportunities to work with community volunteers to assist with the naturalisation of the coastline.

24. For identified ‘areas of particular interest’ with high public usage (Stanmore Bay, Manly Beach and Shakespear Regional Park), the community reference group also helped outline specific community intentions to be reflected in the adaptation strategies.

Adaptation strategies developed collaboratively

25. The Whangaparāoa coast was divided into 35 discrete coastal sections, defined by the driving coastal processes and geomorphology. By aligning the results of the exposure assessment with local iwi feedback, infrastructure and community objectives, a series of adaptation strategies were developed across the short, medium and long-term.

26. Most of Whangaparāoa’s shoreline areas can be managed over the next 100 years with little to no active intervention or significant capital investment. Attachment C (to the agenda report) outlines the changing adaptation strategies across the peninsula over time. Future investment is likely to focus on establishment of managed realignment options or where defense of the shoreline is required.

27. For some low-lying shoreline areas (such as Stanmore Bay Park, Big Manly Beach, northern Red Beach, Matakatia, and Arkles Bay), the escalating risk of coastal inundation and rainfall flooding will require managed realignment of assets in the medium or long-term (50 years and onwards from now). This strategy does not signal abandonment of ‘at risk’ areas but identifies a process to reduce maintenance and renewals costs by moving council assets out of exposed areas to accommodate natural coastal processes and build a more resilient shoreline.

28. Coastal stretches identified as ‘hold the line’ in the medium to long-term have either a strong link to critical infrastructure, high amenity value or have limited space to provide for alternative management options. These include:

· the Hammerhead at Gulf Harbour Marina, which supports the ferry terminal and is a critical transport link

· Hammerhead Beach, which has high community value as open space

· Little Manly Beach, which supports Whangaparāoa Road

· Weiti Boat Club, which is an important recreational water access location.

29. Areas of importance either due to their landscape or heritage value have also been considered. However, it is noted that a separate adaptation plan for specifically managing the shoreline response for cultural heritage sites may be required for incorporation within a wider cultural heritage plan.

Learnings for Future Shoreline Adaptation Plans

30. The Whangaparāoa Pilot is the first of a series of 16 Shoreline Adaptation Plans which will be rolled out concurrently over the next three to five years. The pilot was the first major project focused on adaptation of the coastline to the impacts of climate change. This pilot provided several key learnings which will be incorporated into the future work programme, including:

· Public awareness of the potential impacts of climate change and the need to adapt is low. Significant work is required to engage with the public and prepare them for future coastal change

· Community engagement takes time. The engagement process for each plan needs to be open for feedback for a minimum of 3-4 months

· To adequately capture community values and objectives multiple methods of community engagement, including digital tools and in-person events is required

· Community reference groups, such as the one used in Whangaparāoa, will only be viable in small, condensed shoreline areas.

· Mana whenua partnerships are a critical piece of building a resilient shoreline and relationships should be established early

· Shoreline adaptation plans are strategic guidance documents, not asset management plans. The implementation process of these plans will require collaboration from across Auckland Council departments. Within the plans themselves, no financial investment decisions are made

· Signals and triggers related to the timing of adaptation responses have to be identified at the individual asset level and therefore are not included in these plans.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The Shoreline Adaptations Plans programme is funded as part of the Climate Action Package and is a core climate adaptation workstream. As global temperatures rise, Auckland is predicted to experience between 0.6 m and 1.5 m of sea level rise by 2130, dependent on the future CO₂ emissions scenario. The impacts of climate change and sea-level rise are expected to increase the frequency, intensity and magnitude of natural hazards including coastal erosion, coastal inundation and rainfall flooding.

32. To prepare for the future with climate change, we need to plan adaptively. Shoreline Adaptation Plans will help reduce asset exposure and signal the need to work with nature by developing natural systems (such as wide beaches, well vegetated dunes and tidal marshes) that can help buffer the impacts of climate change.

33. Shoreline Adaptation Plans also assist in educating the public about the impacts of climate change and the need to adapt. Building awareness and signaling the need to be prepared for coastal hazard events is an important part of long-term resilience. For that reason, SAPs report under the Community and Coast priority area of Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri – Auckland’s Climate Plan.

34. The Whangaparāoa Pilot report outlines how Auckland Council owned land and assets in the shoreline area can be managed to mitigate the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change. Implementation of the plan will increase the resilience of the shoreline by decreasing the number of assets in hazards zones. The implementation of the plan will also support the development of natural systems that can act as a future buffer.

35. Greenhouse gas emissions are not considered within the report, which focuses on the strategic goal of adapting the shoreline to build long-term resilience.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. Considering the broad extent of council owned coastal land and assets and the non-statutory nature of the Shoreline Adaptation Plans, implementation of the plan will be a collaborative effort across Auckland Council departments, and the SAP project team has worked in partnership with relevant departments to co-develop the Whangaparāoa Pilot.

37. Strategies will be given effect to and integrated into all relevant council plans and documents including Reserve Management Plans, Regional Parks Management Plans, Open Space Network Plans and Asset Management Plans. Together, this will cascade through to support associated decision making (such as landowner and leasehold approvals).

38. Implementation of the Shoreline Adaptation Plans will be supported by monitoring of coastal assets and the surrounding coastal environment, this will inform triggers for changing management strategies. Monitoring will include coastal asset condition assessments, beach level surveys and tracking the rate of future coastal hazards and climate change impacts undertaken through the council as BAU activities.

39. Adaptation strategies will be integrated into all relevant council strategic and targeted Asset Management Plans to inform appropriate outcomes in the maintenance and renewals work programmes. For example, management of Community Facilities assets that provide a coastal defense or amenity function will be considered through council’s Coastal Assets Renewals Programme. This programme is managed through the Resilient Land & Coasts department who facilitate site-specific assessments of coastal processes, option feasibility and costings, to identify preferred solutions that will align with the overarching adaptation strategies identified in the Shoreline Adaptation Plan.

40. Watercare and Auckland Transport were involved in the development of the Whangaparāoa Pilot and provided insight into infrastructure considerations around the peninsula. These considerations were taken into account in the selection of adaptation strategies.

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

Local impacts and local board views

41. A workshop with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to introduce the SAP process and the need to adapt was given in March 2021. Local board members, Janet Fitzgerald and Chairperson Gary Brown, were included in the community engagement process for the Whangaparāoa Pilot. A second workshop summarising the full development process and outlining the results of the pilot was given on 18 November 2021. Any feedback from the local board during the adoption of this report will be incorporated into the Environment and Climate Change Committee report.

42. Community objectives were considered and are reflected in the development of the adaptation strategies and will inform future projects in the shoreline area including coastal local board and renewals work programmes.

43. The final Whangaparāoa Shoreline Adaptation Plan will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee in March 2022 for approval.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

43. The Shoreline Adaptation Plans programme is designed in the spirit of partnership with mana whenua and the project team meets regularly with the Infrastructure and Environmental Services mana whenua forum.

44. For the Whangaparāoa Pilot, local iwi Ngāti Manuhiri and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki partnered in the development of the plan.

45. Between late March and early October 2021, a series of seven hui with both local iwi were undertaken to understand the cultural values of Whangaparāoa. During those hui, iwi provided three specific themes related to shoreline management: Whakapapa (Ancestry), Taiao (Environment) and Tangata Hononga (Connecting People).

46. The themes and objectives gifted by mana whenua informed the development of the adaptation strategies and are a core foundation of the Whangaparāoa pilot plan report.

47. To further honour these themes, we have recommended that all future shoreline projects on the peninsula:

· value Whakapapa (Ancestry) by acknowledging and supporting the cultural and spiritual values of mana whenua and giving effect to the views of mana whenua regarding culturally significant sites or areas in any coastal management or engineering options

· value Taiao (Environment) by prioritising naturalisation of the shoreline and working to enhance and protect the natural environment. This includes restoration of the natural environment in areas where managed realignment has been recommended and considering nature-based options in areas of hold the line

· value Tangata Hononga (Connecting People) by recognising and supporting the interdependence of people and their environment, providing mana whenua with kaitiaki opportunities, and working with the local community on volunteering opportunities.

48. During the review process, an additional two hui with Ngāti Manuhiri governance were undertaken to clarify how the Shoreline Adaptation Plan aligns with Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau, the wellbeing framework developed by the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in response to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, and Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, the Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework adopted by Auckland Council in 2021. Additional information was added to the Whangaparāoa Report to reflect these discussions.

49. The Whangaparāoa Report was presented to Te Pou Taio (Natural Environment pou of the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum) in February 2022.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

50. Delivery of Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme is regionally funded through the Climate Action Package. No additional funding is sought from local boards to deliver the reports.

51. Mitigating coastal hazards will become increasingly expensive for Auckland and New Zealand. It will not be affordable or feasible to defend everywhere. The Whangaparāoa Shoreline Adaptation Plan will ensure that shoreline projects consider the escalating future risk of climate change and respond in both an environmentally and economically sustainable manner.

52. No financial investment decisions have been made through the pilot. The adaptation strategies of the Whangaparāoa Shoreline Adaptation Plans will be given effect to across relevant council decision making. This includes the future management, maintenance and renewal of council assets and land located along the coast through existing work programmes and associated budgets. Over time, this will result in cost savings as assets are moved out of coastal hazard areas and incur less damage due to coastal erosion and flooding.

53. Once all SAPs across Auckland are completed, a regional funding prioritisation schema will be developed. The framework and process for undertaking this exercise will need to be agreed with the Governing Body. This will assist in budgetary requirements for areas where managed realignment or other major coastal works has been recommended.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

54. Without strategic guidance, coastal asset decisions will be made on an ad-hoc basis and may not take the escalating risk of climate change into account. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan provides the strategic long-term vision for Whangaparāoa’s coastal areas. Implementation of the plan will require multiple departments across council to continue to work together.

55. There is a high level of public interest in the management of the coast, including council-owned land and assets. Potential opposition to the proposed adaptation strategies has been mitigated through the development of the plans in the spirit of partnership with mana whenua, with extensive engagement with the local community, wider public and infrastructure providers.

56. Due to uncertainty in emission reductions, there is a risk that coastal hazards may increase in frequency and intensity earlier than expected. However, the SAP was developed using a conservative, worst-case climate change scenario (RCP 8.5) in the long term, and we consider this risk to be low.

57. As multiple teams are required to work together to implement the SAP, there is potential that the plan is not applied across all business areas. To mitigate this, the SAP project team worked in collaboration with departments across council to develop the plan. A Coastal Governance Group has also been established to oversee the development and delivery of the SAPs work programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. Once the Whangaparāoa pilot Shoreline Adaptation Plan has been endorsed by the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board, staff will present the pilot report and the refined approach to the development of the next Shoreline Adaptation Plan to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval in March 2021.

59. Once approved, it will be released to the public and to stakeholders across Auckland Council and the adaptation strategies will be integrated into key council plans for implementation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Shoreline Adaptation Plan: Whangaparāoa Pilot Report	35
b ⇩	Results of coastal hazard exposure assessment indicating exposure	91
c ⇩	Adaptation strategies across all 35 coastal stretches of Whangaparāoa	93

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tracy Howe – Principal Natural Hazards Specialist

Natasha Carpenter - Coastal Management Practice Lead

Authorisers

Paul Klinac - General Manager Resilient Land & Coasts

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Hibiscus and Bays Local Board for quarter two 2021/2022

File No.: CP2022/01234

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for quarter two, 1 October – 31 December 2021.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the local board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2021/2022 work programme.

3. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020 outcomes.

4. The key activity updates from this quarter are:

· Building resilient and connected communities, both subdivisions adapted to COVID-19 restriction with Future Whangaparāoa launching a grassroots campaign for Christmas called "Random Acts of Christmas" creating, delivering, and sharing the campaign across the wider Hibiscus Coast area. Meanwhile insights from the Mairangi Bay community conversations, led by the local board’s Strategic Broker, are progressing to support the establishment of a local network to encourage collaborative outcomes

· COVID-19 has impacted field work with Pest Free Hibiscus and Bays volunteers. Staff have adapted, focusing time on servicing priority lines and audits. The two funded predator control staff members are on track to deliver the programme before the end of financial year. Meanwhile, Restore Hibiscus and Bays staff delivered 11 predator control lines during November 2021 (including new predator control lines through Stredwick Reserve) and conducted environmental weed control across several reserves. Restore Hibiscus and Bays staff directly supported 478 volunteers this quarter

· Waste Solutions have continued engagement with Zero Waste Early Childhood Education centres remotely throughout lockdown. Social media influence continues to grow across Facebook and a newly established Instagram profile. Several zero waste workshops were delivered online and attended by around 70 Early Childhood Education staff throughout the Hibiscus and Bays area. The Trash Free Taiaotea team continued to engage with businesses, residents and community groups over this lockdown and a zoom workshop targeting stakeholders and local households will be held on 14 December 2021. Website development and a range of collateral (brochures, table toppers, flyers) have been created to support the waste audit programme, keep-cup campaign and upcoming workshops

Services under COVID restrictions

· Libraries continue to support the community via online services, such as Facebook, connecting 3500 teens with motivational books, study, career, and mental health and wellness resources, assisting in their learning and exam preparation

· Leisure centres closed from 18 August to 2 December 2021 due to the COVID-19 lockdown. Staff continued to engage with customers through wellness checks for vulnerable members via phone, regular email, social media updates, and online fitness classes. During Level 3.1 outdoor group fitness classes were introduced. Stanmore Bay aquatics Learn-to-Swim programme (focusing on water safety) commenced on 6 December and Holiday Programmes started on 15 December 2021 with good numbers each day

5. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided a quarterly update against their work programme delivery. Activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred or merged). There are no activities with a red status this quarter.

6. The financial performance report for the quarter is attached (Attachment B to the agenda report) but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on half-year annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for quarter two ending 31 December 2021.

b) note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the agenda report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group half-year results for 2021/2022 are released to the New Zealand Exchange (NZX), which are expected to be made public on or about 28 February 2022.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has an approved 2021/2022 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· External Partnerships

8. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet local board plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

COVID-19 restrictions

9. Auckland faced COVID-19 restrictions (Alert Level 3) from the start of the quarter to 2 December 2021, when all of New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework, also known as the traffic lights. Auckland went into traffic light red, moving to traffic light orange on 30 December 2021.

10. Auckland Council regional and community facilities were closed in Alert Level 3. Restrictions eased slightly in Level 3, Step 2 and from mid-November 2021 libraries and the majority of arts and community centres were reopened. Pools and leisure centres were able to reopen from 3 December 2021 when New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework.

11. Impacts on individual activities are reported in the work programme update (Attachment A to the agenda report).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

12. The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme performance by RAG status

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

13. The graph below shows the stage of the activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

Chart

Description automatically generated

Key activity updates from quarter two

14. The key achievements and updates in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2020/2021 include:

Local board plan outcome: A connected community. Objective: Hibiscus and Bays communities are supported, connected and vibrant

a) Item 204 - Develop a resilient youth ecosystem across the Hibiscus and Bays area. The Youth Network has been meeting with the Convenor every six weeks and has retained good participant numbers. The network is forming solid relationships and a lot of planning has been going into the work and the plans for the future of the project. A newsletter has been started, a funding calendar is in development and the social lab and youth initiative are in development with another opportunity for 360 Empathy sessions

b) Item 214 - Event Partnership Fund Hibiscus and Bays. Due to COVID-19 impacts, there are a lot of changes to various events. Browns Bay and Mairangi Bay Christmas Parades as well as the Torbay Santa Day events were all cancelled. However, the three event partners ran amended Christmas-themed activations that worked within COVID-19 Protection Framework, with the agreement of the local board. The Rodders Festival, scheduled for 30 January 2021, was cancelled. The organisers have been supported to keep $8,301.77 of the funding to cover operational costs already incurred, with the remaining $5,498.23 to be returned and available for the local board to reallocate. Sir Peter Blake Regatta postponed from their December date and are hoping to go ahead in March. For other planned events, Auckland Council Events staff are supporting event organisers to proceeding with event planning within the COVID-19 Protection Framework.

c) Item 208 - Local Contestable Grants and Facilities Grant Hibiscus and Bays. $154,500.87 was allocated in Local and Multi-board Round one, leaving a total of $239,165.13 for the Local Grant round two.

Local board plan outcome: A connected community. Objective: Our libraries, art centres, community services, and privately owned facilities are supported

d) Item 1316 – Whai Pūmanawa Literacy - we support communities to thrive - Hibiscus and Bays. In November, East Coast Bays Library ran a two-week Facebook series ' Non-Fiction November - Dewey Decimal Discovery' featuring new book recommendations for all ages. This popular series reached over 2000 people online during lockdown. All libraries are promoting and registering customers for Beanstack Te Ara Poutama Level Up, summer reading challenges started on 13 December 2021. Customers log their reading, complete activities, and go in the draw to win a summer prize packs.

e) Item 211 - Subsidy for use of Ōrewa Community Centre. Staff have administered the additional subsidised rates as approved by the local board for December bookings only.

Local board plan outcome: A strong local economy. Objective: Our businesses and business centres feel supported and empowered

f) Item 1662 – Supporting business associations – BID establishment. Silverdale Business Association and the BID team presented to the local board members. The project is now progressing with the funding agreement due to be signed and granted in late January 2022. Progress on developing and building the business database is well underway, however due to lockdown restrictions, hosting in person engagement has been postponed until 2022.

Local board plan outcome: A protected and enhanced environment. Objective: Continue to align and support community and volunteer groups, schools, and iwi to enhance and protect our natural environment

g) Item 1249 - HB: Local parks ecological volunteers and environmental programme FY22. All volunteer activity was completely or partially suspended due to lockdown restrictions in Q2 and procurement for the anticipated reinstatement of ecological activities was focussed on. From mid-November some animal pest control work recommenced focusing on areas of high ecological value. Planting and weed maintenance did proceed with contract staff during this quarter. Planning for 2022 planting and programmes has commenced.

Local board plan outcome: A protected and enhanced environment. Objective: Support the development and implementation of ecological and environmental restoration plans

h) Item 74 - Pest plans on private land Okura. The funding agreement with Friends of Okura Bush has been finalised. This will support the Friends of Okura Bush co-ordinator to prepare at least 25 pest control plans for private landowners surrounding the Okura estuary. Friends of Okura Bush have recently reviewed council recommendations to their pest plan template to ensure that it aligns with best practice and council requirements, they have agreed with all council recommendations. Work on delivering these pest plans under the COVID-19 framework should allow pest plan work to commence with COVID- 19 protocols as soon as the agreement is signed.

Local board plan outcome: A protected and enhanced environment. Objective: Our waterways and beaches are clean and safe for people and wildlife

i) Item 822 – Sediment related water quality testing – year 3. Site reconnaissance has been undertaken and the turbidity sensors were installed in October 2021. The first site visit and a data download was undertaken in November 2021. The data showed spikes in turbidity indicating sediment discharges in the catchment had occurred. Compliance was informed and visited the site. Monitoring will continue with follow up compliance visits in Q3. Staff will attend a workshop with the local board to discuss the programme on 24 February 2022.

Local board plan outcome: Open spaces to enjoy. Objective: Proactively identify the needs of our communities and plan for sustainable growth

j) Item 1696 - HB: Boat launching service assessment. Professional services have been engaged to undertake usage survey work over the 2022 summer period.

Local board plan outcome: Open spaces to enjoy. Objective: Provide a range of play and active recreation opportunities for all ages and abilities in our parks, reserves, and coastal environment

k) Item 23960 – Hibiscus and Bays – construct pump track. This project was approved as part of the FY2021/2022 Work Programme on 17 June 2021. Pump track layout and locations were presented to the local board in a workshop on 25 November for feedback.

l) Item 23954 – Hibiscus and Bays – develop dog park. Staff attended a local board workshop on 28 October 2021 to present the development plan for a dog park at Western Reserve, Ōrewa. Site investigations for the East Coast Bays subdivision will continue in Q3 and will be presented at a future workshop.

Activities on hold

15. The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

· Item 17932 – 12 Hibiscus Coast Highway, Silverdale – renew facility. Project deferred to financial year 2023 as a Strategic Assessment will need to be prepared by the Parks, Sport and Recreation team.

· Item 18544 - East Coast Bays Community Centre building - refurbish facility. On 5 July 2021 the Service and Asset Planning team presented the preliminary findings of their needs assessment for this building to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board at a workshop. More detailed findings are still to come.

· Item 18071 – Hibiscus and Bays – deliver Centre Plan improvements. This project is on hold until future years.

Changes to the local board work programme

Activities with changes

16. The following work programmes activities have changes which were formally approved by the local board on 21 October 2021 (Resolution HB/2021/124). The explanation of what changes were made, the budget amounts, and the description of why this was needed are detailed in the table below.

Table 1: Work programmes change formally approved by the local board

Project ID

Project Name

Variations 2021/2022

Description

30512

Gulf Harbour Marina Hammerhead Reserve – renew carpark lights

Proposed savings in FY2021/2022 is $70,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $170,000

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $100,000

Staff identified savings in this project during the investigation and design phase.

It is recommended that these savings are reallocated to other projects in the approved work programme that require additional budget during financial year 2021/2022.

30225

St Annes Hall – refurbish building

Proposed savings in FY2021/2022 is $30,000

FY2022/2023 is $10,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $30,000

2022/2023: $220,000

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in

2021/2022: $0

2022/2023: $210,000

Staff identified savings in this project during the investigation and design phase as less remedial work was required to weatherproof the cladding.

It is recommended that these savings are reallocated to other projects in the approved work programme that require additional budget during financial years 2021/2022 or 2022/2023.

24311

Te Ara Tahuna Cycleway – renew structures

Proposed savings in FY2021/2022 is $142,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $350,269

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $208,269

Staff identified that one of the three bridges at this site could be removed rather than renewed and the local board has agreed to its removal as the site will still be accessible via the other two bridges.

It is recommended that these savings are reallocated to other projects in the approved work programme that require additional budget during financial year 2021/2022.

28183

Freyberg Park - replace pedestrian bridge and boardwalk

Proposed savings in FY2021/2022 is $16,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in FY2021/2022: $82,000

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $66,000

Staff identified savings in this project now that physical works have been completed.

It is recommended that these savings are reallocated to other projects in the approved work programme that require additional budget during financial year 2021/2022.

18641

Cranston Street Reserve – renew play space

Propose to defer $120,000 to FY2024/2025

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $20,000

2022/2023: $100,000

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $0

2022/2023: $0

Staff identified that this play space is in good condition so no longer requires renewal in the financial year 2022-2024 Work Programme.

It is recommended that the renewal of this play space is deferred to financial year 2024/2025 and that the funding for this project over the financial years 2021/2022 and 2022/2023 is reallocated to other projects in the approved work programme.

28178

Browns Bay Reserve – renew play space

Proposed increase in funding for FY2021/2022 is $120,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $234,753

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $354,753

Staff identified that additional funding of $120,000 will be required to renew this play space to the agreed scope.

It is recommended that savings from other projects identified in this report are reallocated to this project to cover these additional costs.

23659

Browns Bay Beach Reserve – replace Beach Front Lane boardwalk

Proposed increase in funding for FY2021/2022 is $190,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $246,967

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $436,967

Staff identified that an increase of $190,000 is required due to the need to change bearer size, additional timber requirements and extension of time to allow for time decking and transport of timber.

It is recommended that savings from other projects identified in this report are reallocated to this project to cover these additional costs.

18638

Hibiscus and Bays – Renew Park Building 2018/2019+

Proposed increase in funding for FY2021/2022 is $40,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $190,000

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $230,000

Staff identified that it is more economical long term to replace the roof on the public toilet block in Agency Lane in Silverdale than renew the existing roof. This will require an additional $40,000.

It is recommended that savings from other projects identified in this report are reallocated to this project to cover these additional costs.

24250

Maygrove Park – renew play space

Proposed increase in funding for FY2021/2022 is $20,000

Approved ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $40,941

Revised ABS: Capex renewal budget in 2021/2022: $60,941

Additional costs of $20,000 were incurred during the construction of the play space for extra equipment, time and remediation at the site due to wet weather.

It is recommended that savings from other projects identified in this report are reallocated to this project to cover these additional costs.

31018

Hatfields Beach – install bollards

Proposed increase in budget from $30,000 to $37,000.

Approved LDI Capex budget in 2021/2022: $0

Approved LDI Capex budget in 2022/2023: $30,000

Revised LDI Capex budget in 2022/2023: $37,000

Staff identified during the investigation and design phase that additional funding of $7,000 is required to deliver this project.

It is recommended that $7,000 is allocated to this project for the financial year 2022/2023 and then the project can be brought forward via RAP to enable early delivery in financial year 2021/2022.

$7,000 LDI Capex funding will be deducted from other projects in financial year 2022/2023 to account for this funding being allocated to this project. This will be reflected in the 2022-2025 Work Programme.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

18. Work programmes were approved in June 2021 and delivery is already underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements.

19. The local board is currently investing in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

i. Item 202 - Building resilient and connected communities across the Hibiscus Coast Subdivision, and Item 201 - Building resilient and connected communities across the East Coast Bays Subdivision. As part of these work programme items, the objective includes a response to the climate crisis through encouraging sustainable environmental outcomes including supporting local sustainable food systems, recycling and upcycling and composting.

ii. Item 1320 - Taonga tuku iho - Legacy - we preserve our past, ensure our future. (Environment) - Hibiscus and Bays. As part of this work programme item, the objective includes Libraries showcasing sustainable workplace practices.

iii. Item 37 - HB: East Coast Bays Leisure Centre Operations and Item 36 - HB: Stanmore Bay Pool and Leisure Centre Operations. As part of these work programme items, the objective includes operating Stanmore Bay Pool and all Leisure Centres in a safe and sustainable manner.

iv. Item 663 - EcoNeighbourh oods Hibiscus and Bays. To continue to support EcoNeighbourhood groups, which comprise six or more neighbours from different households with the objective of adopting sustainable, low carbon practices and increasing resilience within their homes, lifestyles and neighbourhoods. Each group decides the sustainable living activities they will undertake, and a project facilitator supports them to take action. Examples of activities supported include sustainable local food production, street orchards, food swapping, rainwater collection, composting, recycling and upcycling, tree planting and rat trapping.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. This report informs the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board of the performance for quarter two ending 31 December 2021.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22. The local board is currently investing in a number of projects inclusive of Māori outcomes. These include:

i. Item 207 - Funding has been allocated and the conversations and planning has continued for the cultural induction and relationship building for community and local boards. The local board will be updated on the way this project has been able to used to assist conservation work at a workshop 24 February 2022.

ii. Item 1314 - Whakatipu i te reo Māori - we grow the Māori language Celebrating te ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori - Hibiscus and Bays - Local libraries participated in Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori, this being celebrated online during September 13-19. However, due to COVID-19, this was able to be shared via a shared link to the Auckland Libraries Lingogo app at a later date. This app lets you kōrero, whakaronga and ako for free with your Auckland Libraries membership.

iii. Item 3109 - HB: Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming of parks and places) All outstanding names have now been received. Narratives are being finalised with iwi and tranche one names will be presented in Q3. Tranche two sites should now be considered. Savings of $14,000 have been identified in Tranche one and can be returned to the local board for reallocation.

iv. Item 831 - HB: Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming of parks and places) tranche two workshop completed in October. List of sites provided to start formulating Tranche two list. Unlikely to fully deliver tranche two before June 30. May need to carry forward funding to complete delivery of tranche two in FY23.

v. Item 586 - Te Ao Māori and community led conservation – Environmental Services staff have secured $10,000 of Natural Environment Targeted Rate funding alongside Connected Communities' securing an additional $5,000 of Māori outcomes funding to contribute further to this project. Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara and Ngāti Manuhiri have indicated they would like to develop and deliver workshops and inductions for community conservation groups. Ngāti Manuhiri are short of capacity at present and so staff are working together to address this capacity issue before putting extra demand on the iwi for the development of Te Ao Māori workshops. Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara are working on content for cultural inductions and information for community to be able to engage meaningfully with them. They are working towards delivery of inductions in April 2022.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23. This report is provided to enable the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2021/2022 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

24. Auckland Council currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, the council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board and Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of half-year financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2022. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g. building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

26. The approved Customer and Community Services capex work programme include projects identified as part of the Risk Adjusted Programme (RAP). These are projects that the Community Facilities delivery team will progress, if possible, in advance of the programmed delivery year. This flexibility in delivery timing will help to achieve 100 per cent financial delivery for the financial year if projects intended for delivery in the current financial year are delayed due to unforeseen circumstances.

27. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter three (31 March 2022).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: 1 October – 31 December Work Programme update	107
b ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Operating Performance Financial Summary - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Saskia Coley – Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to make a Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2022/00113

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposed new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, staff have summarised the feedback.

3. The proposal helps to help protect sensitive areas, public health and safety and access to public places from harms caused by freedom camping in vehicles by:

· prohibiting or restricting freedom camping in certain areas of Auckland

· providing for freedom camping to be temporarily prohibited or restricted in a specific area

· providing for temporary changes to restrictions that apply in a specific area.

4. Council received feedback from 1,617 individuals and organisations to the Have Your Say consultation and from 1,914 individuals to a research survey. This included 133 Have Your Say feedback and 109 research survey respondents from the Local Board area.

5. All feedback is summarised into the following topics:

Topic	Description
Proposal 1	Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted.
Proposal 2	Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:
Proposal 2.1	Use a certified self-contained vehicle
Proposal 2.2	Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area
Proposal 2.3	Depart by 9am on the third day
Proposal 2.4	Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks.
Proposal 3	Schedule 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping would be allowed.
Proposal 4	Schedule 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping would be allowed subject to conditions.
Other	Suggestions for additional prohibited or restricted areas.
Themes	Summary of key comment themes.

6. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and Governing Body to decide whether to adopt, amend or reject the proposal.

7. There is a reputational risk that Have Your Say feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations and does not reflect the views of the whole community, particularly as Auckland was under Covid-19 restrictions during consultation. This risk is mitigated by the research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders and by providing a summary of all public feedback.

8. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 29 April and 6 May 2022. The Governing Body will make a final decision in June 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive public feedback on the proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022 in this agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in (c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel.

Horopaki

Context

Bylaw regulates freedom camping in public places

9. Auckland’s current Legacy Freedom Camping Bylaw 2015 is a consolidation of pre-2010 legacy bylaw provisions developed before the Freedom Camping Act 2011 was passed.

10. A new bylaw must be made that aligns with the national legislation before the current bylaw expires on 29 October 2022 to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

11. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Freedom Camping Bylaw 2015 in August 2017 which determined that a bylaw made under the Freedom Camping Act 2011 is an appropriate way to manage freedom camping in Auckland.

12. In March 2021 the Governing Body gave staff new direction to inform development of a Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw for Auckland. This decision followed consideration of possible elements to replace an earlier proposal developed in 2018, which was set aside by the Governing Body in August 2019.

13. On 23 September 2021, the Governing Body adopted for public consultation a proposal to make a new Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture ā-Rohe Noho Puni Wātea ā-Waka 2022 / Auckland Council Freedom Camping in Vehicles Bylaw 2022 (GB/2021/112).

14. The proposal helps to help protect sensitive areas, public health and safety and access to public places from harms caused by freedom camping, by:

· excluding land held under the Reserves Act 1977 from scope (council would maintain the current default prohibition on camping on reserves under the Reserves Act 1977, although local boards can choose to allow camping on some reserves by following processes set out in that Act)

· managing freedom camping only on land held under the Local Government Act 2002

· seeking to prevent freedom camping impacts in sensitive areas, and protecting public health and safety and managing access in all areas, by:

o scheduling 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping is allowed

o scheduling 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping is allowed subject to site-specific restrictions

o including general rules to manage freedom camping impacts in all other areas (campers must use certified self-contained vehicles, stay a maximum of two nights, depart by 9am and not return to the same area within two weeks).

15. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 26 October until 5 December 2021.

16. Council received feedback from 1,571 individuals and 46 organisations (1,617 in total) provided via the Have Your Say webpage, by email and at virtual events.

17. Feedback was also received from 1,914 respondents to an external research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders.

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

18. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

19. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

20. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area compared to Auckland-wide feedback

21. A total of 133 Have your Say respondents (HYS) and 109 research survey respondents (RS) from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal:

· for Proposal One there was majority support, similar to the level of support in overall feedback

· for Proposal Two there was majority support for three general rules and support for an alternative departure time

· for Proposal Three there was majority support for the proposed prohibited area in the local board area

· for Proposal Four there was majority opposition for the proposed restricted area in the local board area.

General rule feedback (Proposals 1 and 2)

Proposal	Local board feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
1: Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted	75 per cent HYS support 94 per cent RS support	55 per cent HYS support 90 per cent RS support
2: Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:
2.1: Use a certified self-contained vehicle	72 per cent HYS support · 12 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’ 75 per cent RS support	68 per cent HYS support · 13 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’ 76 per cent RS support
2.2: Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area	46 per cent support · 28 per cent preferred 1 night 76 per cent RS support	39 per cent support · 32 per cent preferred 1 night 70 per cent RS support
2.3: Depart by 9am on the third day	24 per cent support · 38 per cent preferred 10am · 19 cent preferred 8am 41 per cent RS support	28 per cent support · 24 per cent preferred 10am · 23 per cent preferred 8am 52 per cent RS support
2.4: Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks	44 per cent support · 29 per cent preferred 4 weeks 56 per cent RS support	40 per cent support · 28 per cent preferred 4 weeks 55 per cent RS support

Proposal

Local board feedback

Auckland-wide feedback

1: Include general rules in areas we manage where freedom camping is not otherwise prohibited or restricted

75 per cent HYS support

94 per cent RS support

55 per cent HYS support

90 per cent RS support

2: Set four general rules, which would require freedom campers staying in these areas to:

2.1: Use a certified self-contained vehicle

72 per cent HYS support

· 12 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’

75 per cent RS support

68 per cent HYS support

· 13 per cent preferred certified self-contained vehicles ‘unless staying in a serviced area’

76 per cent RS support

2.2: Stay a maximum of two nights in the same road or off-road parking area

46 per cent support

· 28 per cent preferred 1 night

76 per cent RS support

39 per cent support

· 32 per cent preferred 1 night

70 per cent RS support

2.3: Depart by 9am on the third day

24 per cent support

· 38 per cent preferred 10am

· 19 cent preferred 8am

41 per cent RS support

28 per cent support

· 24 per cent preferred 10am

· 23 per cent preferred 8am

52 per cent RS support

2.4: Not return to the same road or off-road parking area within two weeks

44 per cent support

· 29 per cent preferred 4 weeks

56 per cent RS support

40 per cent support

· 28 per cent preferred 4 weeks

55 per cent RS support

Site-specific feedback (Proposals 3 and 4)

Proposal

Local board feedback (n=45)^{^[1]}

Auckland-wide feedback

3: Schedule 45 prohibited areas, where no freedom camping would be allowed

· Metro Park East: 17 support, 15 oppose

· Three people commented on prohibited areas outside of your local board area.^{^[2]}

Majority support for prohibition at 11 areas^{^[3]}

Majority opposition for prohibition at 34 areas

4: Schedule 22 restricted areas, where freedom camping would be allowed subject to conditions.

· Gulf Harbour Marina Hammerhead Reserve: 13 support, 22 oppose

· Three people commented on prohibited areas outside of your local board area.

Majority support for restrictions at one area^{^[4]}

Majority opposition for restrictions at 21 areas

22. Key themes from local feedback are consistent with regional feedback. For example, that:

· the proposed rules are not restrictive enough of freedom camping

· freedom camping causes problems for Auckland and Aucklanders

· many respondents are fundamentally opposed to freedom camping.

23. The proposal can be viewed in the link. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all local board Have Your Say feedback is in Attachment B.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

24. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 22 April 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. Staff note that this is a regulatory process to manage existing activities enabled by central government policy. It is not causing these activities to occur or affecting the likelihood that they will occur. The decision sought in this report therefore has no specific climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The proposal impacts the operations of several council departments and council-controlled organisations, including Licensing and Regulatory Compliance, Parks, Sport and Recreation and Auckland Transport.

27. The Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their primary role in implementing and managing compliance with the Bylaw.

28. Council’s 86 park rangers help to manage compliance with council Bylaws, the Reserves Act 1977 and the Litter Act 1974 by carrying out education and monitoring on parks and reserves. However, rangers are not currently being warranted or renewing warrants, and Licensing and Regulatory Compliance will continue to carry out any enforcement required.

Enhanced service levels for Bylaw compliance activities are not currently budgeted

29. Concern about council’s ability to effectively implement the Bylaw and manage compliance within existing resources was a key theme of public and local board feedback in 2019. This issue remains in 2021 with most local boards (16 out of 21) raising it in response to the draft proposal, and is a key theme from Have Your Say consultation on the proposal.

30. In March 2021 the Governing Body requested advice about costed options for increasing the service levels for compliance associated with this Bylaw. Costings for these options were provided to the Governing Body in September 2021, for consideration during future Long-term Plan and Annual Plan cycles. The options included costings for:

· enhancement of council’s information technology systems, to enable the implementation of the new infringement notice regime

· use of contracted security services, to increase responsiveness to complaints (similar to the current arrangements for Noise Control), or for additional proactive monitoring at seasonal ‘hotspots’

· purchase of mobile printers, to enable infringement notices to be affixed to vehicles in breach of the Bylaw at the time of the offence

· camera surveillance technology to enable remote monitoring of known or emerging hotspots, for evidence-gathering purposes and/or to support real-time enforcement.

31. Local boards were advised in August 2021 that they can request further advice from Licensing and Regulatory Compliance if they wish to consider allocating local budget for enhanced local compliance activities.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. The proposed Bylaw impacts on local boards’ governance role as it affects decision making over local assets, particularly parks and other council-controlled public places. There is also high community interest in freedom camping regulation in many local board areas.

33. Local boards provided formal feedback on the 2018 draft proposal to the Bylaw Panel in 2019, following on from their early feedback given during engagement in 2017, and site-specific feedback provided in 2018. This feedback supported the Governing Body decision to set aside the 2018 proposal to which this new proposal responds.

34. Three local board representatives participated in a joint political working group on 21 May 2021 to provide views on options for including general rules in the Bylaw. The working group unanimously supported the inclusion of general rules in the Bylaw, and five out of six members supported the recommended settings included in the proposal. A summary of the working group’s views was reported to the Governing Body on 27 May 2021.

35. In August 2021 staff sought local board views on a draft proposal for public consultation. The draft proposal was supported by 11 local boards with eight noting concerns or requesting changes, partly supported by six local boards noting concerns or requesting changes, and not supported by three local boards.

36. A summary of local board views of the proposal can be viewed in the link to the 23 September 2021 Governing Body agenda, page 257 (Attachment B to Item 13).

37. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. The Bylaw has relevance to Māori as kaitiaki of Papatūānuku. The proposal supports two key directions in the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau:

· wairuatanga (promoting distinctive identity), in relation to valuing and protecting Māori heritage and Taonga Māori

· kaitiakitanga (ensuring sustainable futures), in relation to environmental protection.

39. The proposal also supports the Board’s Schedule of Issues of Significance by ensuring that sites of significance to Māori are identified and protected from freedom camping harms.

40. Mana whenua and mataawaka were invited to provide feedback during the development of the 2018 proposal via dedicated hui and again through the public consultation process.

41. Feedback received on specific prohibited and restricted areas identified in the 2018 proposal was incorporated into the deliberations. This included the identification of sites of significance to Māori, such as wahi tapu areas.

42. General matters raised by Māori during past engagement included the need to ensure:

· the ability to add further sites of significance to the bylaw as these are designated

· provision for temporary bans on freedom camping, inlcuding in areas under a rahui

· a compassionate approach to people experiencing homelessness

· provision of sufficient dump stations to avoid environmental pollution

· clear communication of the rules in the bylaw and at freedom camping sites.

43. The proposal addresses these matters by proposing to prohibit freedom camping at sites of significance to Māori (such as Maraetai Foreshore and Onetangi Cemetery), provision in the Bylaw for temporary bans, and confirming council’s commitment to a compassionate enforcement approach to people experiencing homelessness.

44. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide any additional feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person. No additional feedback was received from iwi and mataawaka organisations.

45. Eight per cent of people who provided feedback via the Have Your Say consultation and eight percent of research survey respondents identified as Māori.

46. The Have Your Say consultation identified that Māori had similar support for the use of general rules in principle, have similar mixed support on the four specific general rules and similar opposition to the specific restricted and prohibited sites compared to non-Māori.

47. The research survey identified that Māori had similar support for general rules and feel more strongly about the benefits and problems of freedom camping compared to non-Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

49. The following risks have been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by the research survey of a representative sample of Aucklanders and by providing a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

50. On 22 April 2022 local boards may present their formal views to the Bylaw Panel. On 29 April and 6 May 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will make a final decision in June 2021.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of all public feedback to proposed new Freedom Camping Bylaw (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Public feedback from people in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Bayllee Vyle - Policy Advisor

Rebekah Forman - Principal Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2022/00549

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposed new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to make a new Signs Bylaw and associated controls, staff have prepared a summary of feedback.

3. The proposal seeks to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment.

4. Council received responses from 106 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 27 October 2021. All feedback is summarised by the following topics:

· Proposal 1: Banners	· Proposal 10: Verandah signs
· Proposal 2A: Election signs (9-week display)	· Proposal 11A: Wall-mounted signs (Heavy Industry Zones)
· Proposal 2B: Election signs (directed at council-controlled parks, reserves, Open Space Zones)	· Proposal 11B: Wall-mounted signs
· Proposal 2C: Election signs	· Proposal 12: Window signs
· Proposal 3A: Event signs (temporary sales)	· Proposal 13A: Major Recreational Facility Zones
· Proposal 3B: Event signs (election sign sites and not-for-profits)	· Proposal 13B: Open Space Zones
· Proposal 3C: Event signs	· Proposal 13C: Commercial sexual services
· Proposal 4: Free-standing signs	· Proposal 14A: General (safety and traffic)
· Proposal 5A: Portable signs (City Centre Zone)	· Proposal 14B: General (tops of buildings)
· Proposal 5B: Portable signs	· Proposal 14C: General (illuminated signs)
· Proposal 6: Posters	· Proposal 14D: General (business that cease trading)
· Proposal 7A: Real estate signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	· Proposal 15: Controls and approvals
· Proposal 7B: Real estate signs	· Proposal 16: Enforcement powers and penalties, and savings
· Proposal 8: Stencil signs	· Other feedback
· Proposal 9: Vehicle signs

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel in making recommendations to the Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport about whether to adopt the proposal.

6. There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal on 28 March 2022, and deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body in April 2022. The Governing Body and the Board of Auckland Transport will make final decisions in April and May 2022 respectively.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback on the proposal to make a new Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2022 / Signs Bylaw 2022 and associated controls in this agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel.

Horopaki

Context

Two bylaws currently regulate most signs in Auckland

8. Two bylaws currently regulate most signs in Auckland:

· The Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu 2015 / Signage Bylaw 2015 and associated controls

· Te Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu Pānui Pōti a Auckland Transport 2013 / the Auckland Transport Election Signs Bylaw 2013.

9. The Signage Bylaw minimises risks to public safety, prevents nuisance and misuse of council controlled public places, and protects the environment from negative sign impacts.

10. The Election Signs Bylaw addresses public safety and amenity concerns from the negative impacts of election signs.

11. The rules are enforced by Auckland Council’s Licensing and Regulatory Compliance unit using a graduated compliance model (information, education and enforcement).

12. The two bylaws and controls are part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the:

· Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in part for billboards and comprehensive development signage

· Auckland Council District Plan – Hauraki Gulf Islands Section for signs on, in or over a scheduled item or its scheduled site on the Hauraki Gulf islands

· Electoral Act 1993, Local Electoral Act 2001 and Electoral (Advertisements of a Specified Kind) Regulations 2005 for elections

· Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices and New Zealand Transport Agency (Signs on State Highways) Bylaw 2010 for transport-related purposes

· New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority codes and the Human Rights Act 1993 for the content of signs

· Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 and Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015 for signs and structures in public places such as for events.

13. The Signage Bylaw 2015 will expire on 28 May 2022 and council must make a new bylaw before that date to avoid a regulatory gap.

Council and Auckland Transport proposed a new bylaw for public feedback

14. On 26 August 2021, the Governing Body and Board of Auckland Transport adopted a proposal 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 (GB/2021/103; Board of Auckland Transport decision 26 August 2021, Item 10).

15. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Signage Bylaw 2015 (see figure below).

Calendar

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

16. The proposal seeks to better manage the problems signs can cause in relation to nuisance, safety, misuse of public places, the Auckland transport system and environment. Major proposals in comparison to the current bylaws are:

· to make a new bylaw and associated controls that combines and revokes the current Signage Bylaw 2015 and Election Signs Bylaw 2013

· in relation to election signs, to:

o enable election signs on places not otherwise allowed up to nine weeks prior to an election

o clarify that election signs on private property must not be primarily directed at a park, reserve, or Open Space Zone

o remove the ability to display election signs related to Entrust

· in relation to event signs:

o allowing event signs on the same roadside sites as election signs

o clarifying that community event signs on community-related sites may only be displayed if a not-for-profit provides the event

o enabling signs for temporary sales

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

· increase the maximum flat wall-mounted sign area in the Heavy Industry Zone to 6m²

· add rules about signs that advertise the temporary sale of goods

· retain the intent of the current bylaws (unless stated) while increasing certainty and reflecting current practice. For example, to clarify that:

o signs on boundary fences with an Open Space Zone require council approval

o the placement of directional real estate signs applies to the ‘three nearest intersections’

o changeable messages relate to transitions between static images

o LED signs must comply with the relevant luminance standards

o there is a limit of one commercial sexual services sign per premises

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

17. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 22 September until 27 October 2021. Council received feedback from 76 people and 30 organisations (106 in total).

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

18. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

19. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

20. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people from the local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. A total of four people from the local board area provided feedback to the proposal.

22. There was majority support for Proposals 1, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4, 5A, 5B, 7A, 12, 14A, 14B, 14C and 15, split support (50 per cent) for Proposals 2A, 2B, 2C, 6, 7B, 8, 11A, 13B and 16, and majority opposition for Proposals 9, 11B, 13C and 14D. Opinions about the remaining proposals were mixed, with no clear majority of respondents in support or opposition.

23. In contrast, there was majority support for all proposals (except Proposals 9 and 13A) from all people who provided feedback Auckland-wide.

Support of proposal in the local board area

Topic	Local board feedback		Auckland-wide feedback
Topic	Support	Opposition	Support	Opposition
P1: Banners	100 per cent	0 per cent	73 per cent	22 per cent
P2A: Election signs (9-week display)	50 per cent	50 per cent	53 per cent	36 per cent
P2B: Election signs (directed at council-controlled parks or reserves, or at an Open Space Zone)	50 per cent	50 per cent	63 per cent	35 per cent
P2C: Election signs	50 per cent	25 per cent	67 per cent	21 per cent
P3A: Event signs (temporary sales)	100 per cent	0 per cent	54 per cent	34 per cent
P3B: Event signs (election sign sites and not-for-profits)	100 per cent	0 per cent	59 per cent	27 per cent
P3C: Event signs	100 per cent	0 per cent	78 per cent	7 per cent
P4: Free-standing signs	100 per cent	0 per cent	66 per cent	14 per cent
P5A: Portable signs (City Centre Zone)	67 per cent	0 per cent	65 per cent	20 per cent
P5B: Portable signs	100 per cent	0 per cent	74 per cent	8 per cent
P6: Posters	50 per cent	50 per cent	76 per cent	16 per cent
P7A: Real estate signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	100 per cent	0 per cent	56 per cent	32 per cent
P7B: Real estate signs	50 per cent	0 per cent	62 per cent	24 per cent
P8: Stencil signs	50 per cent	50 per cent	71 per cent	13 per cent
P9: Vehicle signs	0 per cent	100 per cent	40 per cent	43 per cent
P10: Verandah signs	0 per cent	50 per cent	54 per cent	18 per cent
P11A: Wall-mounted signs (Heavy Industry Zones)	50 per cent	50 per cent	60 per cent	24 per cent
P11B: Wall-mounted signs	0 per cent	100 per cent	59 per cent	24 per cent
P12: Window signs	100 per cent	0 per cent	69 per cent	28 per cent
P13A: Major Recreational Facility Zones	0 per cent	50 per cent	48 per cent	10 per cent
P13B: Open Space Zones	50 per cent	0 per cent	59 per cent	21 per cent
P13C: Commercial sexual services	0 per cent	100 per cent	73 per cent	20 per cent
P14A: General (safety and traffic)	67 per cent	33 per cent	67 per cent	13 per cent
P14B: General (tops of buildings)	67 per cent	0 per cent	79 per cent	18 per cent
P14C: General (illuminated signs)	67 per cent	33 per cent	74 per cent	8 per cent
P14D: General (business that cease trading)	0 per cent	67 per cent	58 per cent	37 per cent
P15: Controls and approvals	100 per cent	0 per cent	52 per cent	24 per cent
P16: Enforcement powers and penalties, and savings	50 per cent	0 per cent	62 per cent	7 per cent

Note: Above percentages may not add to 100 per cent because they exclude ‘don’t know’ / ‘other’ responses.

24. Key themes from the Auckland-wide feedback highlighted issues with illuminated signs (Proposal 14C), general rules for event signs (Proposal 3C), portable signs (Proposal 5B) and posters (Proposal 6), and the rules for commercial sexual service signs (Proposal 13C).

25. The proposal can be viewed in the link. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area is in Attachment B.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

26. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 28 March 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. Council considered climate impacts as part of the Bylaw review and proposal process. The use of signage in Auckland has minor climate implications.

28. The proposal continues to support climate change adaptation, for example by requiring signs to be secured and not able to be displaced under poor or adverse weather conditions.

29. The proposal has a similar climate impact as the current bylaws, for example illuminated signs may have a minor impact on emissions. The Bylaw however is limited in its ability to regulate for sustainability purposes. The Bylaw must be reviewed in 5 years and committee has resolved to investigate redistributing sign rules between the Bylaw and the Auckland Unitary Plan as part of the Plan’s next review (REG/2020/66) at which time illumination and sustainability issues could be examined.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30. The proposal has been developed jointly with Auckland Transport.

31. The 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, and Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland and Auckland Transport.

32. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. The Bylaw is important to local boards due to its impact on local governance. For example, it regulates signs about community events and signs on local facilities and parks.

34. Local board views were sought on a draft proposal in July 2021. The draft was supported in full by four local boards, 16 suggested changes and one deferred a decision. A summary of local board views and changes made to the draft proposal can be viewed in the 17 August 2021 Regulatory Committee agenda (Attachment B to Item 10).

35. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. The proposal supports the key directions of rangatiratanga and manaakitanga under the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025, and the Auckland Plan 2050’s Māori Identity and Wellbeing outcome by:

· balancing Māori rights under Te Tiriti o Waitangi to exercise their tikanga and rangatiratanga across their whenua with the council’s and Auckland Transport’s obligations to ensure public safety^{^[5]}

· supporting Māori who want to make their businesses uniquely identifiable and visible

· enabling Māori to benefit from signs to promote and participate in community activities and events, share ideas and views, and engage in elections

· protecting Māori and Tāmaki Makaurau’s built and natural environments from the potential harms that signs can cause.

37. The Issues of Significance also contains key directions for council-controlled organisations to integrate Māori culture and te reo Māori expression into signage. The council group are implementing policies to support the use of te reo Māori in council infrastructure and signs. The proposal, however, does not require the use of te reo Māori on signs as there is no central government legislation that gives the council or Auckland Transport the appropriate bylaw-making powers for this purpose.

38. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

39. Five individuals identifying as Māori (6 per cent of submitters) provided feedback.

40. There was majority support for Proposals 3A, 3C, 4, 5A, 5B, 6, 7B, 8, 11B, 12, 14A, 14B, 15 and 16, split support (50 per cent) for Proposals 1, 2A, 3B, 7A, 11A, 13A, 13B and 14C, and majority opposition to Proposals 2B, 9, 13C and 14D. Opinions about the remaining proposals were mixed, with no clear majority of respondents in support or opposition.

41. In contrast, there was majority support for all proposals except for Proposals 9 and 13A from all people who provided feedback Auckland-wide.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

44. On 28 March 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body and the Auckland Transport Board in April 2022. The Governing Body and the Auckland Transport Board will make a final decision in April and May 2022 respectively.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of all public feedback (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Copy of local feedback from the local board area (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Steve Hickey - Policy Analyst

Elizabeth Osborne - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Paul Wilson - Senior Policy Manager

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Public feedback on proposal to amend Stormwater Bylaw 2015

File No.: CP2022/01111

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015, before a final decision is made.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. To enable the local board to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to a proposal to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015, staff have prepared feedback summary and deliberation reports.

3. The proposal helps protect the stormwater network from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance by requiring approvals for vesting of new stormwater assets, and ensuring effective maintenance and operation of private stormwater systems.

4. Auckland Council received responses from 79 people and organisations.^{^[6]} All feedback is summarised by proposal and other matters as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Main proposals to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015

Topic	Description
Proposal One	Controls on public stormwater network and private stormwater systems.
Proposal Two	Additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals.
Proposal Three	Approving modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points.
Proposal Four	Restricting or excluding activities for parts of the stormwater network.
Proposal Five	Updating the bylaw wording, format, and definitions.
Other	Other bylaw-related matters raised in public feedback and other additional matters.

5. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel and the Governing Body to decide whether to adopt the proposal.

7. The Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body on 4 April 2022. The Governing Body will make a final decision on 28 April 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback on the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 in this report

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal in recommendation (a) to assist the Bylaw Panel in its deliberations

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in b) to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint replacement(s) to the persons in c) should an appointed member be unable to present to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

Horopaki

Context

The Bylaw regulates public stormwater network and private stormwater systems

8. The Governing Body adopted Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā, Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 on 30 July 2015 (GB/2015/78), which replaced the operative and draft bylaws from the previous legacy councils.

9. The Bylaw seeks to regulate land drainage through the management of private stormwater systems and protection of public stormwater networks from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance.

The Bylaw is part of a wider regulatory framework

10. The Bylaw is part of a suite of regulatory tools used to manage stormwater and land drainage throughout the Auckland region, including the Resource Management Act 1991, Local Government Act 2002 and Local Government Act 1974.

11. The Bylaw is supported by operational guidelines and processes such as Engineering Plan Approvals. The council grants the approvals to developers for new private connections to the public stormwater network and vesting of public stormwater network for new developments.

12. Various Auckland Council teams such as Healthy Waters, Regulatory Compliance, and Regulatory Engineering work collaboratively to implement and enforce the Bylaw.

The council proposed amendments to improve the Bylaw for public feedback

13. On 26 August 2021, the Governing Body adopted the proposal to amend Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Te Ture-ā-rohe Wai Āwhā 2015 / Auckland Council Stormwater Bylaw 2015 (Bylaw) for public consultation (GB/2021/102).

14. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Stormwater Bylaw 2015 by the Regulatory Committee in 2020 (REG/2020/43). Figure 1 describes the process for the statutory review and the proposal to amend the Bylaw.

15. The proposal seeks to better protect the stormwater network from damage, misuse, interference and nuisance, by:

· specifying controls, codes of practice or guidelines for managing the public stormwater network and private stormwater systems

· considering additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals under the Bylaw

· requiring approvals for modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points into the stormwater network

· restricting or excluding certain activities for parts of the stormwater network

· updating Bylaw wording, format, and definitions.

16. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 22 September to 27 October 2021. During that period, council received feedback from 61 individuals and 18 organisations.

Diagram, timeline

Description automatically generated

Figure 1. Process for the statutory review and the proposal to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015

The local board has an opportunity to provide views on public feedback

17. The local board now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal before a final decision is made.

18. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Bylaw Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

19. The nature of the local board views are at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board could:

· indicate support for matters raised in public feedback by people and organisations from their local board area

· recommend how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Feedback from people in the local board area supports the proposal

20. Two people from the local board area provided feedback summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Support of proposal in the local board area

Proposal	Local Board feedback	Auckland-wide feedback
1: Controls on public stormwater network and private stormwater systems.	100 per cent support	60 per cent support
2: Additional requirements for vesting of public assets and approvals	50 per cent support	47 per cent support
3: Approving modifications or new engineered wastewater overflow points	100 per cent support	64 per cent support
4: Restricting or excluding activities for parts of the stormwater network	0 per cent support	48 per cent support
5: Updating the bylaw wording, format, and definitions	100 per cent support	73 per cent support

21. The full proposal can be viewed in the link. Attachment A of this report contains a draft Bylaw Panel deliberations report. Attachment B of this report contains a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

22. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Bylaw Panel on 4 April 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. Effective stormwater management enhances Auckland’s response to climate change through resilience and adaptation to increased extreme weather events by regulating land drainage. Carbon emissions from constructed infrastructure can also contribute to climate change.

24. The proposal enables the council to help meet its climate change goals and align the amended Bylaw with the Built Environment priority of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

25. Feedback was received in relation to the latest version of the Stormwater Code of Practice, seeking to incorporate the sea rise levels based on the climate change scenario identified in the Auckland Climate Plan. This feedback has been forwarded to the relevant council units for consideration.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The Bylaw impacts the operations of Auckland Council’s Healthy Waters teams as well as teams involved in the regulation, compliance and enforcement of stormwater such as the Regulatory Engineering and Regulatory Compliance. Impacted departments have been consulted with and are aware of the proposals.

27. Healthy Waters staff have also worked closely with Watercare to ensure the amended Bylaw is consistent with the recently updated Water Supply and Wastewater Network Bylaw 2015.

28. Auckland Transport has also submitted its formal feedback on the proposal.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. Under the agreed principles and processes for local board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019, the Bylaw has been classified as low interest. It is also considered to be of no impact on local governance for local boards.^{^[7]}

30. Interested local boards have an opportunity to provide their views on public feedback to the proposal formally by resolution to the Bylaw Panel in February 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. The proposal supports the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021-2025 key direction of Manaakitanga – Improve Quality of Life by managing land drainage.

32. Mana whenua were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through online meetings, in writing via email, or through the online form.

33. The majority of submitters who identified as Māori supported Proposals One, Three, Four and Five. There was an even split between those who supported and opposed Proposal Two.

34. Some concerns were raised about Māori customary fishing rights when access to parts of the stormwater network is restricted. Any restrictions for health and safety reasons would be considered on a case-by-case basis with due consideration given to factors including access for cultural reasons. Further explanation on this matter is contained in the deliberations for Proposal Four.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. There are no financial implications for the council arising from decisions sought in this report. The cost of reviewing the Bylaw and its implementation will be met within existing budgets.

36. Public feedback raised concerns regarding the financial cost of implementing the latest version of the Stormwater Code of Practice incorporating the sea rise levels based on the climate change scenario identified in the Auckland Climate Plan. This feedback (Attachment F of the draft Bylaw Panel report) has been forwarded to the relevant council units for consideration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

37. The following risk has been identified, shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Risks and mitigations relating to local board consideration of public feedback to the proposal

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and organisations.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38. On 4 April 2022 the Bylaw Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body.

39. The Governing Body will make a final decision on 28 April 2022 (refer to the ‘Process to amend the Stormwater Bylaw 2015’ diagram in the Context section of this report).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft Bylaw Panel Deliberations Report (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board public feedback	163

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dean Yee – Healthy Waters Specialist

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Auckland Transport - proposed speed limit changes (Tranche 2A)

File No.: CP2022/00884

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To formalise local board feedback on Tranche 2A of Auckland Transport’s proposed speed limit changes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Through Vision Zero, Auckland Transport has adopted the goal of eliminating road transport related deaths and serious injuries within the Auckland road network by 2050. One of the faster and most cost-effective ways to prevent deaths and serious injuries is to set safe and appropriate speed limits for the function, safety, design and layout of roads.

3. As part of Tranche 1 of Auckland Transports Safe Speeds Programme safe speed limits were set on many high risk urban and rural roads and within town centres across Auckland between June 2020 and June 2021.

4. Roads where safe speed limits were set on 30 June 2020 have experienced a 67 per cent reduction in fatalities, 19 per cent reduction in all injury crashes, and a minor reduction in serious injuries^{^[8]}. Total deaths and serious injuries reduced on these roads by seven per cent, compared to an upward trend in road trauma seen on the rest of the road network.

5. Further changes to speed limits are now being proposed for a number of roads across Auckland where current speed limits are not deemed safe and appropriate. This is referred to as Tranche 2A of the Safe Speeds Programme.

6. Details of the changes proposed in each local board area are provided as Attachment A to the agenda report.

7. Public Consultation on Tranche 2A closed on 14 November 2021. A summary of the consultation feedback is provided as Attachment B to the agenda report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback on Tranche 2A of Auckland Transport’s proposed speed limit changes.

Horopaki

Context

8. Auckland Transport (AT) is the road controlling authority for all roads within the Auckland transport system. Generally, this is the local road network which includes public roads and beaches but excludes State Highways for which Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency has responsibility.

9. Reviewing and ensuring that speed limits across Auckland are set at speeds that are appropriate for road function, safety, design and use, is one of the key measures that AT is undertaking to improve safety on Auckland’s roads. Setting safe and appropriate speed limits will contribute to a reduction in deaths and serious injuries on our roads and ensure speed limit consistency on the network.

10. Setting safe and appropriate speed limits also supports Auckland Transport’s Vision Zero approach (adopted by the AT Board in September 2019), which provides that no deaths or serious injuries (DSI) are acceptable while travelling on our transport network.

11. Auckland Transport controls more than 7,300 kilometres of roads and - through the Safe Speeds Programme - is working through a multi-year programme to review all speed limits across its network.

12. Speed limits must be reviewed and set (by bylaw) in accordance with the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017. In line with government strategy and legislation, AT is prioritising high risk roads for review.

13. Previously AT made the Speed Limits Bylaw 2019 (under the Land Transport Act 1998) which set new speed limits for the highest risk roads following AT’s first tranche of speed limit reviews. Within this first tranche, speed limits were reviewed on around 10 per cent of the local road network. Where new safe and appropriate speed limits were required to be set, these came into effect from mid-2020 to mid-2021.

All road performance

14. Roads where speed limits were changed on 30 June 2020 have experienced a 67 per cent reduction in fatalities, 19 per cent reduction in all injury crashes, and a minor reduction in serious injuries. Total deaths and serious injuries (DSI) reduced by seven per cent.

15. This equals four lives saved and 48 less injury crashes on roads treated with safe and appropriate speeds.

Rural road performance

16. Rural roads where speeds were changed on 30 June 2020 have seen a 78 per cent reduction in fatalities and a small reduction in serious injuries.

17. This equates to a DSI reduction of 16 per cent on the rural network where speed limit changes have been made. The overall number of crashes is similar to pre-implementation, but the crash severity rates have reduced, this is what would be expected on higher speed roads.

18. While it will take additional time to confirm that these trends are sustained, initial indications are promising.

19. Auckland Transport is now proposing further speed limit changes for a number of roads across Auckland after reviewing and finding that their current speed limits are not safe and appropriate. This is part of the second tranche of reviews under the Safe Speeds Programme (Tranche 2A).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

20. Auckland Transport is proposing to amend the Speed Limits Bylaw 2019 and set new safe and appropriate speed limits for 823 roads across Auckland with a total length of 614km (approximately eight per cent of the road network), with these new limits proposed to come into force mid-2022.

21. Auckland Transport has reviewed the existing speed limits for each of the roads identified and found they are not safe and appropriate for the function, design and use of the roads. This means there is now a legal obligation to improve the safety of the roads. Making no change is not an option. This means AT is required to either:

· set a new safe and appropriate speed limit, or

· install engineering measures to improve the safety of the road, like road widening, resurfacing, barriers, road markings, speed humps etc.

22. Physical constraints and the corresponding costs involved mean that it isn’t viable to ‘engineer up’ these roads to support their existing speed limits. Setting safe and appropriate speed limits is one of the fastest and most cost-effective ways of reducing the number of deaths and serious injuries on our roads.

Community Engagement

23. Public consultation on the Safe Speeds Programme Tranche 2A took place from 27 September – 14 November 2021, including:

· a flyer mailout to 340,257 properties and PO Boxes on/near the roads where changes to speed limits are proposed

· advertising in the NZ Herald, community newspapers, specialist/ethnic media:

o Central Leader, East & Bays Courier, Eastern Courier, Manukau Courier, North Harbour News, North Shore Times, Nor-West News, Papakura Courier, Rodney Times, Franklin County News, Western Leader, Hibiscus Matters, Pohutukawa Times, Chinese Herald, Mandarin Pages, Ponsonby News

· radio advertising on: Niu FM, Radio Samoa and Radio Waatea

· radio interviews and adlibs on: Niu FM, Radio Samoa and Radio Waatea

· media release and on-going media engagement

· published an article in Our Auckland

· translated consultation materials into Te Reo Māori, Tongan, Samoan, Simplified Chinese, Korean and NZ Sign Language

· sent flyers, posters and hardcopy Freepost feedback forms, in multiple languages to every library and service centre in Auckland

· put posters on trains, buses and ferries that could reach 280,000 commuters each day

· 15 online webinars.

24. Feedback has been provided through a number of channels:

· online via AT.govt.nz/haveyoursay

· via a survey

· via a mapping tool

· at public hearings held on 25 November 2021.

25. Local boards have also had the opportunity to present at public hearings.

26. A summary of feedback from the local community has been provided as Attachment B. This includes feedback on specific streets in your area, as well as broad feedback about the Safe Speeds Programme more generally.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. The primary climate change benefit of safe and appropriate speed limits is that they support and encourage greater take-up of walking, cycling and micromobility by reducing the risk to vulnerable road users, making these modes more attractive. This supports emissions reductions.

28. For town centres where speed limits were reduced and safety improvements introduced under the first tranche of speed limit changes, there has been strong positive feedback, with 19 per cent of respondents advising they are now participating in at least one active mode activity (e.g. walking or cycling) more often since the projects have been completed.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. The Safe Speeds Programme has been endorsed by the AT Board, the Auckland Council Planning Committee and conforms with direction from the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2018/19 – 2027/28 and the Auckland Transport Alignment Project.

30. In March 2021, Auckland Transport staff held a workshop with Auckland Council’s Planning Committee to provide an update to councillors on Vision Zero, road safety performance over the past three years and sought feedback on the direction and priorities for Tranche 2 of the programme. The committee expressed informal strong support for the direction of the Safe Speeds Programme, with a number of members supportive of the programme moving faster into their community areas.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. Public submissions and feedback are provided as Attachment B.

32. This report provides the opportunity for local boards to provide feedback on changes proposed in Tranche 2A.

33. Feedback provided in relation to Tranche 1 has also been considered by Auckland Transport in the development of the current proposals.

34. For the residential areas where speed limits have been reduced under the first tranche of the Safe Speeds Programme, there has been strong positive feedback on the safety improvements, with 79 per cent of respondents commenting that the area feels safer overall. As noted above, 19 per cent of respondents advised they are now participating in at least one active mode activity (e.g. walking or cycling) more often since the projects have been completed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

35. Engagement on Tranche 2 has been undertaken with kaitiaki at northern, central and southern transport hui during 2021 alongside detailed engagement on the rural marae workstream, which is part of the second stage of Tranche 2.

36. Mana whenua are, in general, supportive of the Safe Speeds Programme and positive safety, community and environmental outcomes arising through safe and appropriate speed limits. There is in particular strong engagement and support for the rural marae workstream which forms part of the second phase of Tranche 2.

37. Further engagement will be undertaken following the public engagement period to determine feedback on and support for the final proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38. There are no financial implications arising from local boards providing feedback on the Safe Speeds Programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

39. Delays due to COVID-19 and lockdown in the Auckland region have added complexity to both public consultation and implementation timelines.

40. When Auckland moved into alert level four, a temporary pause was put on all new consultations to allow time to adapt our consultation strategy and increase our digital engagement. The following measures were undertaken to ensure a quality engagement process:

· the consultation start date was delayed by three weeks from 6 September to 27 September 2021

· the consultation length was extended from five to seven weeks

· the number of online events during the consultation was significantly increased

· digital advertising spend was increased, and digital engagement plans were put in place with Auckland Council’s engagement partners who helped reach our diverse communities.

41. Steps have also been taken to ensure flexibility in the implementation timeline, and local boards will be kept up to date with any changes to the dates that the new speed limits will take effect.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. Early in 2022 Auckland Transport will finalise an analysis and feedback report, including feedback from both the public and local boards.

43. On 31 March 2022 staff will present this report and recommendations to the AT Board.

44. The new speed limits are proposed to come into force on 31 May 2022 for the majority of roads, and 13 June 2022 for roads associated with schools, allowing for school speed changes to be made at the start of a school week.

45. These dates may need to be revised due to the impacts of COVID-19 and to take into account consultation feedback. Local boards will be kept updated if any changes are made.

46. More speed limit changes (Tranche 2B) are planned to be publicly consulted in 2022. AT has engaged with all local boards affected by Tranche 2B and will continue to keep local boards updated as the speed reviews are finalised.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Hibiscus and Bays Local Board - proposed speed limit changes - Tranche 2A	173
b ⇨	Summary report of consultation feedback on speed limit changes (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Oliver Roberts – Acting General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Proposed Auckland Council submission on the Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application

File No.: CP2022/01337

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek Local Board feedback to inform a council-wide submission through the Environment and Climate Change Committee on the proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application to Department of Conservation (DOC).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Friends of the Hauraki Gulf Incorporated have lodged an application to DOC for a proposed marine reserve northwest of Waiheke Island (Hākaimangō-Matiatia).

3. Given the regional implications of significant marine protection initiatives at any one location, Auckland Council’s submission on this application is being considered through the Environment & Climate Committee on 10 March 2022. The Natural Environment Strategy Unit is leading this work.

4. Local Board feedback will help inform a council wide submission drawing on a request for input from mana whenua, and other technical staff evaluation and input.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback to inform a council-wide submission through the Environment and Climate Change Committee on the proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application to Department of Conservation (DOC).

Horopaki

Context

5. Central government have publicly notified council and other interests of an application for the proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve at the northwestern end of Waiheke Island, lodged by Friends of the Hauraki Gulf Incorporated. Further information on the application can be found here.

6. The proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application covers 2,350 ha with boundary limits between Hakaimango Point to Matiatia Point (see Figure 1).

7. There is an existing strategic direction for marine protection within the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park / Tikapa Moana / Te Moananui-ā-Toi (the Gulf). The Sea Change – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan (Sea Change) was publicly released in December 2016. Sea Change included numerous objectives and recommendations for multiple stakeholders to improve the waiora (health) and mauri (life force) of the Gulf.

8. In 2020 central government released a Government Response Strategy to Sea Change titled Revitalising the Gulf: Government action on the Sea Change Plan (Government Response Strategy). This included 11 proposed new high protection areas, two additional areas of marine protection adjacent to existing marine reserves and five proposed seafloor protection areas in the Gulf. Our current understanding is that central government intend to formally consult on these areas on as part of a generic process, with the prospect of successfully considered sites being recognized in law in 2024.

9. The proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application is distinct and additional to the proposed marine protected areas within the Government Response Strategy. However, the Government Response Strategy did note that it did not include proposed marine protection adjacent to Waiheke Island and recognised that there were other community driven initiatives on the island seeking greater marine protection in the Gulf.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. Council’s submission will assess the application’s merits in line with the Marine Reserves Act 1971, noting that under the Act marine reserves may be established to preserve areas for scientific study, that contain underwater scenery, natural features, or marine life of distinctive quality, or so typical, beautiful, or unique that their continued preservation is in the national interest.

11. Regarding this, we note that in the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act (2000), the Hauraki Gulf, its islands, and catchments are recognized as nationally significant. A number of statutory agencies need to reflect that recognition in each of their own decision-making under other legislation (e.g., Resource Management Act).

12. For the proposed area within the Gulf, an ecological survey was undertaken in 2016 by Haggitt (2016), found here, who concluded that the area contained a diverse range of physical and biological habitats. However, reef fish biodiversity was low. Council staff assessment will consider other information sources to contextualise the local information available.

13. As part of council’s submission process, we will also consider the relationship of the application with Sea Change – Tai Timu Tai Pari Hauraki Gulf Marine Spatial Plan and the Government Response Strategy, found here, as well as any impacts (positive or negative) on local community use and Auckland’s strategic / planning context.

14. In evaluating this application, Natural Environment Strategy staff noted Waiheke Local Board passed resolutions in May 2021 (Resolution number WHK/2021/84) which state:

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) consider marine protection proposals for the board’s endorsement if sought prior to an application being lodged with the relevant Minister.

b) will consider endorsing any marine proposals based upon the following factors:

i) tangata whenua views

ii) alignment with endorsed local board policies and plans

iii) specialist supporting advice

iv) level of wider community involvement and support.

c) seek further assurances from the Minister that the Ngāti Pāoa rāhui is being progressed to a timely conclusion.

d) seek to understand progress on the ministerial proposal on which the local board and community may respond with respect to Sea Change and proposed protections for the waters of the Hauraki Gulf.

Additional documents

15. The Marine Reserves Act (1971) can be accessed here Marine Reserves Act 1971 (external site)

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16. The decision to submit on the proposed application will not alter emissions or alter our adaptation to the impacts of climate change.

17. Climate change will result in impacts on marine environments and managing the environment through protection measures like marine reserves may help support some species (e.g., increase their abundance, less stressors) although this may change over time.

18. Assessments for marine reserves do not explicitly require climate change consideration.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. Internal staff views are being sought across the following council divisions:

· Chief Planning Office (Plans and Places, Auckland Plan Strategy and Research)

· Regulatory Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services (Environmental Services)

· Customer and Community Services.

20. Positive or negative impacts on council activities will be assessed.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. Since 2013, the Waiheke Local Board has been developing their aspirations for marine protection initiatives around Waiheke Island. This had included the option of a potential marine reserve site (for the purposes of the Marine Reserves Act 1971), at the northern area off Waiheke Island.

22. Any placement of a marine reserve in the Hauraki Gulf will lead to different outcomes and uses for the wider Gulf. Whilst assessing this application on its own merits against relevant statutory tests, there is a need to consider the wider marine protection proposed and being developed across the Gulf. A wider network of marine protection is being considered in the Gulf under the Revitalising the Hauraki Gulf, Central Government’s Response strategy to Sea Change. This application represents an additional marine protection area to those included in the government response strategy to the Sea Change Plan. How the proposed site compares with alternative locations will be considered.

23. There is a range of marine protections being considered for the Hauraki Gulf. Marine reserves have a specific purpose defined under the Marine Reserves Act (1971). Other forms of protection are available through measures in the Fisheries Act 1996. Marine protection sites in the government’s response strategy to the Sea Change plan range from full protection (i.e., Marine Reserves) through to other forms of high protection areas (i.e., equivalent to a range of Fisheries Act tools).

24. Local board feedback is being sought on the proposed Hākaimangō-Matiatia Marine Reserve application and will be used to to inform a council-wide submission through the Environment and Climate Change Committee. Local Boards will be able to convey any impacts that may arise, should central Government decide to create a marine reserve at this or nearby sites.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25. Staff are seeking views from mana whenua. A memo has been sent to mana whenua representatives across the Auckland region seeking their feedback.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

26. For Auckland Council activities, it is not expected to generate extra direct costs as marine reserves are administered by DOC.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. The application process administered by DOC is to seek public submissions to ascertain what are the opportunities and challenges presented by the proposal. For Auckland Council, this internal consultation with Local Boards, mana whenua and specialist staff is to identify where the potential risks and mitigations are prior to the council taking an overall position.

28. There may be a potential reputational risk for council in either supporting or opposing the application. To address this risk, our approach is to be objective and evaluate the proposal on both the merits and any potential impacts of the proposal.

29. Council will need to understand, where possible, the mana whenua perspective on this application before making recommendations to the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. The deadline for local board feedback is Wednesday 23 February 2022.

31. Auckland Council staff, led by Natural Environment Strategy, will be presenting to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 10 March 2022.

32. A final council submission on the proposed application is expected to be submitted prior to the closing date of 20 March 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Auckland’s Water Strategy

File No.: CP2022/00619

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the Auckland Water Strategy framework before it is recommended for adoption by the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Water Strategy sets a vision for Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland’s waters and provides strategic direction for investment and action across the Auckland Council group.

3. The vision of the Water Strategy is: te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced.

4. Local boards have previously provided feedback on the 2019 public discussion document (Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei), and this was considered in the development of the Auckland Water Strategy. Local board feedback is now being sought on the draft Auckland Water Strategy framework.

5. The core content for the Auckland Water Strategy framework was endorsed at the Environment and Climate Change Committee on the 2nd of December 2021 (ECC/2021/44). The content is now being drafted into a final document and will be brought to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for consideration and adoption in March 2022.

6. Staff workshopped the framework with the Environment and Climate Change Committee and local board chairpersons throughout September-November 2021. The chairpersons received explanatory memos and supporting material ahead of workshops. Feedback during those workshops shaped the core content adopted at committee in December 2021.

7. Refer to Attachment A to the agenda report for the core content of the Auckland Water Strategy framework.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the eight strategic shifts of the Water Strategy framework:

i) Te Tiriti Partnership

ii) Empowered Aucklanders

iii) Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access

iv) Regenerative Water Infrastructure

v) Water Security

vi) Integrated Land use and Water Planning

vii) Restoring and Enhancing Water Ecosystems

viii) Pooling Knowledge.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Auckland Council group has a broad role in delivering water outcomes:

· Auckland Council provides storm water infrastructure and services; resource management regulation, consenting, monitoring, and compliance for effects on fresh water and coastal water; and research, reporting, policy, and strategy functions

· Watercare provides drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and services

· Auckland Transport influences land use and the storm water network. The transport network is Auckland’s largest public realm asset and investment.

9. The Auckland Council (the Water Strategy) project began as a response to the 2017 Section 17A Value for Money review of three waters^{^[9]}delivery across the council group. The review recommended the council produces a three waters strategy. The scope of the water strategy was subsequently expanded to incorporate other water related responsibilities, outcomes, and domains (e.g. natural waterbodies, groundwater, coastal waters, etc).

10. A discussion document (Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei) was consulted on in 2019. The purpose of this document was to elicit community views on the future of Auckland’s waters and how the council should be planning for these in its water strategy.

11. This process established a high-level vision for Auckland’s waters, ‘te Mauri o te Wai o Tāmaki Makaurau - the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water - is protected and enhanced’, and presented key values, issues and principles that were designed to inform strategy development. Actions and targets were not discussed. Strategic direction, actions and targets have been identified as part of the subsequent strategy development.

12. The Water Strategy sets a vision for Auckland’s waters and provides strategic direction for investment and action across the council group. The council has developed the strategy drawing on:

· relevant legislation and central government direction

· the council’s strategies, policies and plans, and guidance including:

o The Auckland Plan 2050 - includes high-level approaches for how we can prioritise the health of water in Auckland by adopting a te ao Māori approach to protecting our waters; adapting to a changing water future; developing Aucklanders’ stewardship; restoring our damaged environments; protecting our significant water bodies; and using Auckland’s growth to achieve better water outcomes.

o Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri Auckland's Climate Action Plan - acknowledges that climate change will mean a changing water future and identifies integrated, adaptive planning approaches and water-sensitive design as key enablers of a climate-ready Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

· the council’s Three Waters Value for Money (s17A) Review 2017

· the Our Water Future - Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei discussion document framework and feedback from local boards, community and mana whenua from 2019

· individual iwi engagement and Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum engagement in 2021

· internal staff engagement during 2020-2021

· the Water Sensitive Cities Index and benchmarking in 2021.

13. The intent of the Water Strategy is that the council fulfils its obligations to identify and plan for future challenges across its broad range of functions that affect water outcomes. These challenges are:

· protecting and enhancing the health of waterbodies and their ecosystems

· delivering three-waters services at the right time, in the right place, at the right scale, as the city grows

· having enough water for people now and in the future

· reducing flood and coastal inundation risk over time

· water affordability for Aucklanders

· improving how the council works with its treaty partners

· improving how the council organises itself to achieve these outcomes.

14. The Water Strategy is intended to guide decision-making to 2050. Staff have therefore considered Tāmaki Makaurau’s broader context over the life of the strategy including:

· land use change, as driven by population growth in particular

· mitigating and adapting to climate change

· partnership approach with mana whenua

· growing iwi capacity and further settlements that will affect governance structures

· technological change.

15. Council has also considered the direction from central government to deliver management of freshwater, land use and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects, including cumulative effects^{^[10]}.

Central Government Three Waters Reform

16. The Water Strategy has been developed during a period of significant uncertainty for the council group. Central government has recently indicated that participation in the proposed Three Waters Reforms will be mandated in the planned enabling legislation. The reforms would move management of three waters assets to a new inter-regional entity. Economic regulation is also planned.

17. While the final form of the proposed structures is not known, it is important to understand that the proposed reform would not affect all areas of delivery for the Water Strategy. Council would retain its:

· core role as environmental regulator

· core role as regulatory planning authority

· core treaty partnership role for local government

· core role to engage and be the voice for Auckland communities

· management of the council group’s own water consumption (towards consumption targets).

18. The Water Strategy provides strategic direction to the council group. Over the next few years, as the shape and impacts of proposed reform become clearer, the council would use the strategy in appropriate ways to provide direction to any processes that arise. This strategy would become council’s position on the aims and outcomes sought from any new entity.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. The purpose of this report is to provide local boards with an opportunity to feedback on the Auckland Water Strategy framework before it is finalised and recommended for adoption by the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

The Water Strategy Framework

20. The Water Strategy framework sets a vision for the future (previously adopted in 2019), a foundational partnership and eight key strategic shifts to guide change. The vision of the Water Strategy is: te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced.

21. The framework articulates Auckland’s context, challenges, aims, and required actions. The framework is designed to make implementation steps clear for council to track progress and so that communities and partners can hold council accountable to progress over time.

22. The framework consists of:

· vision

· treaty context

· challenges

· cross-cutting themes

· strategic shifts and associated aims and actions

· implementation.

23. The diagram below shows the Auckland Water Strategy Framework. Refer to Attachment A for the core content of the Auckland Water Strategy framework, including the aims and actions associated with each strategic shift.

Vision: te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced

24. Auckland’s vision for the future is ‘te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau, the life-sustaining capacity of Auckland’s waters, is protected and enhanced’.

25. The Water Strategy vision describes Tāmaki Makaurau’s desired long-term future and will guide council decision-making over time towards that agreed goal. The vision outlines a future for Tāmaki Makaurau where the region’s waters are healthy, thriving, and treasured. This vision also describes a future where the deep connections between water, the environment and people are recognised and valued.

26. The mauri – the life sustaining capacity – of water is a fundamentally intuitive concept. It is something all Aucklanders can appreciate. There is a qualitative difference that is readily felt and sensed when walking alongside a healthy waterbody compared to a waterbody that has been channeled, polluted, or piped, for example.

27. The Our Water Future public discussion document received strong support for the vision. In the document, the vision was explained as:

· special to this place (Auckland)

· recognising the vital relationship between our water and our people

· recognising the role of mana whenua as kaitiaki within the region

· representing values that can unify us in our actions

· setting a long-term aspiration for the way we take care of our waters.

28. The council set a long-term aspiration for Auckland when it adopted this vision in 2019. An aspiration for a future in which:

a) Aucklanders are able to swim in, and harvest from, our rivers, estuaries and harbours.

b) Life in and sustained by water is thriving.

c) Everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs.

29. Adopting this vision recognised that addressing Auckland’s water issues and challenges over time requires a bold vision and new ways of working together with council’s treaty partners and communities. The vision signals a greater recognition of a Māori worldview, of environmental limits and interconnectedness of people and environment.

30. The vision is also consistent with council’s obligations and aspirations, as well as central government direction. For example,

· the purpose of local government is to take a sustainable development approach to the broad role of promoting the four well-beings

· the purpose of the Resource Management Act is sustainable management of natural and physical resources in ways that enables the four well-beings

· Te Mauri o te Wai aligns with te Mana o te Wai in the National Policy Statement – Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM), which provides for local expression

· the Auckland Plan directs council to ‘Apply a Māori worldview to treasure and protect our natural environment (taonga tuku iho)’

· mauri is embedded in the Auckland Unitary Plan

· the Our Water Future public discussion document introduced the vision of te mauri o te wai o Tāmaki Makaurau and applying a Māori world view

· Te mauri o te wai is referenced in the council’s 2021 Infrastructure Strategy.

Over-arching challenges

31. The intent of the Water Strategy is that the council fulfils its obligations to identify and plan for future challenges across its broad range of functions that affect water outcomes. Tāmaki Makaurau faces several overarching challenges that inform the strategic direction set by the Water Strategy. These are:

· protecting and enhancing the health of waterbodies and their ecosystems

· delivering three-waters services at the right time, in the right place, at the right scale, as the city grows

· having enough water for people now and in the future

· reducing flood and coastal inundation risk over time

· affordability for Aucklanders

· improving how the council works with its treaty partners

· improving how the council organises itself.

32. Attachment A provides a more detailed description of each over-arching challenge.

Treaty Context

33. Māori have enduring rights and interests related to water as a taonga and as indigenous peoples. These rights are affirmed under Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and international law.

34. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its statutory Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi responsibilities. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland context. Like the council, mana whenua are long-term contributors to water outcomes.

35. This section within the framework acknowledges that the treaty provides the context for partnership between council and mana whenua for the protection, management, and enhancement of water.

Cross-cutting themes

36. In addition to over-arching challenges, there are cross-cutting themes that inform the council’s strategic approach in the Water Strategy. The cross-cutting themes must be accounted for as the actions in the strategy are delivered.

Climate Change

37. Water and climate change are intrinsically linked. The twin challenges of mitigation and adaptation have been integrated within the strategy.

Equity

38. The Auckland Plan 2050 describes sharing prosperity with all Aucklanders as a key challenge now and for the future. Auckland has equitable access to water supply and sanitation and performs well against international peers; however, there are areas for improvement that are captured in the strategy. Other equity issues such as flood protection and access to blue-green space for recreation are also considered within the strategy.

Strategic Shifts

39. The Water Strategy framework includes eight overarching strategic shifts. Each strategic shift is intended to represent long-term change in the council’s approach towards a stated aim. To achieve this, each strategic shift has associated actions with indicative implementation timings identified. Shifts are designed so that the council can add actions over time to the framework as progress is made.

40. The strategic shifts were arrived at by considering the changes that the council must make to respond to the challenges and cross-cutting themes above, as well as responding to the water sensitive cities benchmarking undertaken. Actions were developed and grouped according to council functions so that they might be more easily implemented by areas in the council group.

Table one: Water Strategy Strategic Shifts and Associated Aims
Strategic shift	Aim
Te Tiriti Partnership The council and mana whenua working together in agreed ways on agreed things.	The council and mana whenua iwi are partners in the protection, management, and enhancement of water.
Empowering Aucklanders Working with Aucklanders for better water outcomes.	Aucklanders are empowered to shape decisions about and are prepared for our changing water future.
Regenerative Water Infrastructure Auckland’s water infrastructure is regenerative, resilient, low carbon, and increases the mauri of water. It’s able to be seen and understood by Aucklanders.	Regenerative infrastructure systems enhance the life-sustaining capacity of water (mauri).
Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access Prioritising mauri when using water, to sustain the environment and people in the long term.	When the council allocates water from the natural environment, water use is sustainable, and considers the health and wellbeing of ecosystems and people.
Water Security Water abundance and security for growing population through efficient use and diverse sources.	Auckland captures, uses, and recycles water efficiently so that everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs.
Integrated Land use and Water Planning Integrating land use and water planning at a regional, catchment and site scale.	Water and its life-sustaining capacity is a central principle in land management and planning decisions.
Restoring and Enhancing Water Ecosystems Catchment-based approaches to the health of water ecosystems.	Auckland has thriving and sustainable natural water ecosystems that support life, food gathering and recreation.
Pooling Knowledge Shared understanding enabling better decisions for our water future.	Auckland has the knowledge about water needed to make good quality, timely, and strategic decisions about water.

Implementation

41. Successfully delivering on the vision and integrated aims of the Water Strategy will require a coordinated and sustained approach to delivery across the council group.

42. The Water Strategy sets out a range of actions to be implemented over time for the council group. The actions fall within two broad timeframes: near term (year one and years one – three) and medium term (years four – ten). Near term actions are prescriptive and specific. Medium term actions are more illustrative and require further development to implement successfully.

43. To implement the Water Strategy, the council will need:

· to take a consistent, sustained approach to putting te mauri o te wai at the centre of council group planning and investment decisions and action

· the skills and capacity to deliver on the water strategy, legislative requirements, and partnership relationships

· a strong culture of holistic planning, action, reporting and post-implementation review that feeds back into adaptive planning processes

· clarity of the roles and responsibilities across the council group, with all teams directed and accountable for their role and function

· to give mana whenua clear sight of the council’s work on water and enable participation/direction.

44. Changes required to give effect to the implementation of the strategy include:

· appoint Executive Lead Team Water Lead (complete)

· Water Strategy programme implementation coordinator

· coordinated workforce planning to fill gaps and changing needs

· update investment prioritisation criteria to reflect the Water Strategy

· council reporting on te mauri o te wai

· integrated Asset Investment and Asset Management Planning, with an independent audit process.

Central government context

45. The Water Strategy considers and responds to current and expected direction from central government to:

· deliver management of freshwater, land use and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way

· a strengthening of the partnership between the council and mana whenua in environmental management goal setting and decision-making frameworks

· the inclusion of Te Mana o Te Wai in the Auckland Unitary Plan

· a switch from an individual activity effects-based assessment (under the Resource Management Act 1991) to a more holistic limits-based approach, reflecting the need to better manage cumulative effects on water bodies

· an expectation of stronger enforcement of regulatory environmental obligations through policy effectiveness reporting (feedback loops between policy and actions) and improved compliance monitoring and enforcement reporting.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

46. Water and climate change are intrinsically linked. Climate change is a cross cutting theme of the Water Strategy (along with equity). The twin challenges of mitigation and adaptation were integrated into the strategy’s core content as it was developed.

47. Climate change will have wide-ranging implications for the issues raised in the Water Strategy, including:

· influencing demand for water use

· affecting water availability of a given water source over time

· increasing flood and coastal inundation hazard risk to life and property.

48. Improving our mitigation of and resilience to these impacts via the approaches described in the Water Strategy aligns with council’s existing goals and work programmes for climate action.

49. The physical impacts of climate change will have implications both for water management (including Māori water rights) in Auckland, and for related issues such as energy supply, social welfare, food security, and Māori land.

50. Water infrastructure has significant embodied carbon emissions. The regenerative water infrastructure strategic shift sets the council on a path to zero or low emissions water infrastructure.

51. The projected impacts of climate change on Auckland’s aquatic environments, and the associated risks, are detailed in two key report series: the Auckland Region Climate Change Projections and Impacts^{^[11]} and the Climate Change Risk in Auckland technical report series^{^[12]}.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

52. There is broad agreement across the council group that better integration in water-related matters is needed, and that improvements in investment and decision-making processes are possible.

53. Staff have worked across the council group to develop the Water Strategy’s core content through working groups, workshops, and review of material.

54. The strategic shifts and actions in the Water Strategy represent significant change in the way that the council group approaches water-related challenges and opportunities in Auckland. In time, the way that staff work and the tools they have available will change. Greater and more coordinated oversight of resources that are used to deliver water outcomes is essential.

55. The Water Strategy embeds concepts like mauri and water-sensitive design into council’s approach going forward. These actions require careful, considered partnership with mana whenua to create new frameworks that will guide decision-making. Coordinated education and upskilling programmes for staff will be needed to enable successful implementation.

56. Of note is the action to implement a council group knowledge governance framework for water. This will mean review and redesign of processes governing the production of knowledge; how council mobilises knowledge for different users and uses; and how council promotes the use of knowledge.

57. The framework will help facilitate a culture change across the council group, encouraging the sharing of knowledge across departments and organisations, and better connecting teams in the ownership of knowledge and insights.

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

Local impacts and local board views

58. Local boards have a strong interest and role in improving water outcomes across Auckland and currently fund many local projects focused on restoration of local waterways.

59. Staff workshopped the Water Strategy framework, including each strategic shift and associated aims and actions, with the Environment and Climate Change Committee and local board chairpersons September to November 2021. The chairpersons received explanatory memos and supporting material ahead of workshops. Feedback during those workshops shaped the core content adopted at committee in December 2021.

60. Previous local board feedback informed development of the Water Strategy. Staff held workshops with all local boards in late 2018 on the Our Water Future – Tō Tātou Wai Ahu Ake Nei discussion document and sought their feedback through formal business meetings. Local board resolutions were provided to the Environment and Community Committee in December 2018 (ENV/2018/168) when the discussion document was approved for public consultation.

61. During public engagement, local boards hosted many of the Have Your Say consultation events and helped to ensure local views were fed into the feedback. This feedback has been an input to the development of the strategy. There was broad support for the vision, values, issues, processes and principles presented in the discussion document. The Environment and Climate Change Committee adopted the framework as the basis for developing the Auckland water strategy.

62. Key themes from local board engagement are presented below. Staff have designed the strategic shifts and actions to address these key themes – these are noted in italics:

i) A desire to improve engagement with local communities and deliver targeted education programmes – Empowering Aucklanders strategic shift.

ii) Recognising water is a limited resource, that access to water is a human right and supply must be allocated fairly – Water Security and Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access strategic shifts.

A need to improve the diminishing water quality of local water bodies including urban streams, gulfs and harbours – Restoring and Enhancing water ecosystems strategic shift.

iii) A need to carefully manage urban development and take up opportunities to embed water-sensitive design - Integrated Land use and Water Planning strategic shift.

iv) A need for proactive monitoring and enforcement, supported by a robust and transparent evidence base – Pooling Knowledge strategic shift.

63. Feedback on several water-related topics that were not part of the discussion document’s scope was also received from local boards. This included water infrastructure, the importance of future proofing our assets, incorporating sustainable options such as greywater reuse and roof collection, and the management of contaminant run-off and stormwater discharges.

64. Staff considered these important issues and they have been incorporated into the strategy – see Regenerative Water Infrastructure strategic shift.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

65. Every iwi and hapū has associations with particular waterbodies^{^[13]} that are reflected in their whakapapa, waiata, and whaikōrero tuku iho (stories of the past). Protecting the health and mauri of our freshwater ecosystems is fundamental to providing for the food, materials, customary practices, te reo Māori, and overall well-being of iwi and hapū.

66. Engagement with Māori that has informed this work includes:

· Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum Guidance to the Water Strategy 2019

· submissions to the Our Water Future Public Discussion Document 2019

· Te Pou Taiao engagement throughout 2021

· individual engagement with iwi partners 2021 including face-to-face hui.

67. Refer to Our Water Future: Report on Māori response to Auckland Council Water Strategy consultation for further information on the submissions of Māori who responded to public discussion document consultation. Key themes from Māori engagement are presented below. Staff have designed the strategic shifts and actions to address these key themes – these are noted in italics:

i) Māori are committed to the maintenance of the mauri of water and they want to be a part of the conversation – Te Tiriti Partnership and Empowering Aucklanders strategic shifts.

ii) Awareness/Education (concerns for peoples’ priorities, climate change has arrived – inevitable there will be changing water patterns) – Empowering Aucklanders strategic shift.

iii) Water sovereignty (should be allowed water tanks on our properties) – Water Security strategic shift.

iv) Reciprocity (look after our environment it will continue to look after us) – Restore and Enhance Water Ecosystems, Sustainable Allocation and Equitable Access and Regenerative Water Infrastructure strategic shifts.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

68. Implementing the proposed Water Strategy actions will have budgetary implications in time. Cost scenarios have not been undertaken for the actions as this is work that is required as the group works through the implementation of the strategy. Most actions do not commit the council group to a singular solution, but rather to investigate options and their associated cost within the action, for subsequent decision making. From a cost perspective it is expected that the actions associated with each strategic shift will be possible through:

· providing clear strategic direction to improve current processes (no new spend)

· redirecting current spend to higher priority activity aligned to strategic direction

· new spend, prioritised through council processes (i.e. Annual Budget and Long-Term Plan/10-year Budget).

69. Over the next 30 years, the council expects to spend approximately $85 billion on infrastructure for three waters alone (capital and operational expenditure). There is considerable scope to align that spend to the vision of the water strategy.

70. Where actions do require additional spend, such spend must be considered through council’s Annual Plan and Long-term Plan/10-year Budget processes. Additional spend would not be limited to three waters infrastructure and services and would include all council group functions related to water outcomes.

71. It is also noted that central government’s messaging for its Three Waters Reform programme suggests the proposed new water entities may have access to greater lending facilities. This would presumably impact delivery of three waters infrastructure and services in Auckland, some of which would relate to the proposed Water Strategy’s strategic shifts and associated actions.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

72. The recommendation requesting local board views does not present a risk.

73. The risks and mitigations listed below relate to the Environment and Climate Change Committee’s decision to adopt the Water Strategy.

Risk

Assessment

Mitigation/Control measures

Insufficient or inconsistent implementation of the strategy

Medium risk

Poor coordination is a key driver for the strategy and implementation must respond to this reality.

The Strategy needs buy-in across the council leadership and consistent political leadership to ensure coherent implementation.

Staff with responsibilities for shifts and actions have been engaged in the development of the strategy.

A Water Strategy programme implementation coordinator will provide support to implementation.

Central government reform: if established, a new three waters entity disregards strategic intent of Water Strategy

High risk

The council should use the Water Strategy to assist in articulating the long-term aims for water in Auckland. The Strategy may also be useful to guide discussions during any transition process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

74. The Water Strategy final document and will be brought to Environment and Climate Change Committee for consideration and adoption in March 2022.

75. A high-level implementation plan for the Water Strategy, with action-owners, will accompany the final document.

76. The actions related to each strategic shift may require further refinement and the core content will require editing appropriate for an external-facing document. A workshop of the Environment and Climate Change Committee on actions and the draft strategy will be scheduled prior to the Water Strategy document being presented to Environment and Climate Change Committee for adoption. Local board chairpersons will be invited to that workshop.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Water Strategy Core Content (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Toby Shephard – Lead Strategist

Authorisers

Carol Hayward – Team Leader Operations and Policy

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa - New Zealand Geographic Board: recording of unofficial place names as official

File No.: CP2022/00737

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To inform local boards about an opportunity to provide input to a project being undertaken by Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa New Zealand Geographic Board to record large numbers of unofficial place names as official.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa New Zealand Geographic Board are undertaking a project to record unofficial place names as official.

3. Around 30,000 place names throughout New Zealand have been shown on maps and charts for many years yet are not official. Of this there are 1,421 identified within the Auckland Region.

4. Where there is no other recorded name for a place, and where Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers it unlikely that the public would object, a fast-track process is enabled under legislation.

5. Of the 1,421 names proposed to be made official, 690 are non-Māori in origin, and 731 are te reo Māori.

6. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa are consulting with councils and relevant mana whenua to ensure names are adopted correctly and remove place names from the fast-track process if there are any objections. The fast-track process does not require public consultation.

7. Within Auckland Council, local boards are best placed to provide local views. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa are also consulting directly with mana whenua to ensure their views are represented.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) receive the report, including attachments which detail the unofficial place names in the local board area which are proposed to be made official

b) provide feedback on any place names that, in their view, should not proceed under the fast-track process.

Horopaki

Context

8. Around 30,000 place names throughout New Zealand have been shown on maps and charts for many years yet are not official. Of this there are 1,421 identified within the Auckland Region.

9. Making place names official is important as it means there is one agreed and correct name for a place, which is especially important in an emergency. It is also an important way to formally recognise New Zealand’s unique culture and heritage.

The fast-track process

10. Section 24 of the New Zealand Geographic Board Act 2008, known as the fast-track process, authorises Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa to use its discretion to make existing recorded (unofficial) place names official when:

· there is no other recorded name for a place or feature on a map or chart, or in a database that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers to be authoritative, and

· Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa considers it unlikely that the public would object.

11. A recorded place name is one that has been used in at least two publicly available publications or databases that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has agreed are authoritative.

12. A programme to implement this fast-track process is divided into the councils by region so that hundreds of existing recorded place names can be made official as part of one process.

13. The fast-track process does not require public consultation. However, Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is consulting with councils and relevant mana whenua.

14. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has sought expert advice from a licensed te reo Māori translator about the correct standard conventions for writing the Māori place names, for example, spelling and macron use.

15. This project does not include applying formal boundary extents to any suburbs or localities – it is only about their names.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has given Auckland Council the opportunity to provide feedback on 1,421 unofficial places names throughout the Auckland region to ensure that any issues or concerns are identified before the place names are officially adopted.

17. Within the shared governance structure of Auckland Council, local boards are best placed to represent local views.

18. The 1,421 place names are spread across all 21 of Auckland’s local boards, distributed as follows:

Table 1: Number of unofficial place names proposed to be adopted as official

Local Board	Number of place names
Albert-Eden Local Board	22
Aotea/Great Barrier Local Board	171
Devonport-Takapuna Local Board	24
Franklin Local Board	177
Henderson-Massey Local Board	17
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	58
Howick Local Board	21
Kaipātiki Local Board	22
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board	17
Manurewa Local Board	11
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board	20
Ōrākei Local Board	28
Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board	5
Papakura Local Board	10
Puketāpapa Local Board	14
Rodney Local Board	397
Upper Harbour Local Board	44
Waiheke Local Board	184
Waitākere Ranges Local Board	133
Waitematā Local Board	29
Whau Local Board	17

19. There is also an online map available showing the locations of each place name at https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=ef47da1929664e3aba10233306a5449a

20. The list of proposed place name approvals has been divided into four types of change that Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa are proposing to make:

a) Previously unofficial Māori place name to be adopted as is (376) (Attachment A to the agenda report)

b) Previously unofficial Māori place name adopted with the addition of macrons (205) (Attachment B to the agenda report)

c) Previously unofficial Māori place name where more information or clarification is sought regarding whether the name has been captured correctly (150) (Attachment C to the agenda report)

d) Previously unofficial non-Māori place name to be adopted as is (690) (Attachment D to the agenda report).

21. The process for local boards to provide input is as follows:

· this report provides each local board with a list of recorded unofficial names that are proposed to be made official, organised into the four different types noted above

· each local board is invited to provide feedback on the following matters:

o any concerns, such as incorrect spelling, or other known names for the places or features

o any history/origin/meaning of these names that they wish to provide

o identification of any place names should not proceed under the fast-track process.

22. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa will not proceed with making a place name official if it is likely to cause controversy within a community. If a local board wishes to have a place name removed from the fast-track process, they must make it clear in their feedback to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa which name they object to, and why.

23. Any place names removed from the fast-track process will remain as an unofficial recorded place name and will not be discontinued or deleted.

24. More information on proposing a name change outside of the fast-track process can be found at https://www.linz.govt.nz/regulatory/place-names/propose-place-name.

25. Each local board will receive a follow up memo at the conclusion of this project advising which names have been formally adopted within their local board area and which remain as an unofficial recorded place name.

26. Any stories that relate to local place names provided to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa may be entered in the New Zealand Gazette.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. There are no climate implications from providing feedback on unofficial names proposed to be made official.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

28. Auckland Council’s GIS team is involved in this project to ensure that place names are recorded correctly with regards to feature type, and coordinates/position.

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

Local impacts and local board views

29. The list of proposed place names includes a substantial number of Māori names, and all local board plans include objectives relating to delivering on commitments to Māori.

30. Any place name that the local board or mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast track process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa is consulting directly with mana whenua on the appropriateness of formalising place names that are currently in common use.

32. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa has worked with a licensed Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori translator to ensure that Māori place names currently in common use reflect correct spelling and macrons, and that their correct meanings are understood. Any place names mana whenua are not able to clarify will be removed from the fast track process.

33. Any proposed names that mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast-track process.

34. The Auckland Plan 2050 includes the outcome Māori Identity and Wellbeing: A thriving Māori identity is Auckland's point of difference in the world. It advances prosperity for Māori and benefits all Aucklanders.

35. The Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework - Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau – includes a number of mahi objectives which are relevant to this work:

· the council group supports te reo Māori to be seen, heard, spoken and learned throughout Tāmaki Makaurau

· the council group reflects and promotes Māori culture and identity within the environment, and values mātauranga Māori

· the council group fulfils its commitments and legal obligations to Māori derived from Te Tiriti o Waitangi and has the capability to deliver Māori outcomes.

36. Ensuring that unofficially recognised Māori place names currently in use become part of New Zealand’s official list of place names is an important step to delivering on these outcomes.

37. Likewise, ensuring that non-Māori names are not officially adopted where there is a te reo Māori name known to local iwi also delivers on these commitments.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

38. There are no financial implications from receiving this report.

39. There are no requirements to update signage, as all of the place names are commonly in use and would not create a name change.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

40. Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa will not proceed with making a place name official if it is likely to cause controversy within a community. Any place name that the local board or mana whenua object to will be removed from the fast-track process.

41. If any concerns arise in the future over the newly adopted official place names Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa may publish an amending notice in the NZ Gazette, or the public can make a proposal to Ngā Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa, depending on the nature of the change.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. Local boards are invited to provide formal feedback on the list of place names attached.

43. A follow-up memo will be shared with local boards indicating which place names were approved in each local board area as part of the fast-track process.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	NZ Geographic Attachment A Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	203
b ⇩	NZ Geographic Attachment B Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	205
c ⇩	NZ Geographic Attachment C Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	207
d ⇩	NZ Geographic Attachment D Hibiscus and Bays Local Board	209

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

17 February 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 165 Wainui Road, Silverdale

File No.: CP2022/00189

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 165 Wainui Road, Silverdale.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Oaks Development Limited, agent Mark Simento of Maven Associates Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana Whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the guidelines, however no responses have been received.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 165 Wainui Road are:

· Te Wēiti Loop (applicant’s preference)

· Hinonga Loop (alternative 1)

· Auahatanga Loop (alternative 2)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approves the name Hinonga Loop (1^st alternative suggestion) for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 165 Wainui Road, Silverdale, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60360489 and SUB60360581, and road naming reference RDN90097581).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN60360489 (subdivision reference number SUB60360581) was issued in December 2020 for the construction of 76 new residential freehold units and one commonly owned access lot (COAL).

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

8. In accordance with the standards, any public road or any private way, commonly owned access lots (COAL), and right of way, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

9. In this instance the COAL requires a name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the COAL is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. 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 developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

11. The guidelines provide for 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; or

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

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

12. Theme: The applicant has proposed the following names, as detailed in the table below:

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Te Wēiti Loop (applicant’s preference)	Te Reo Māori name for Silverdale, Te Wēiti means little river or river bordered by cabbage trees. The Wēiti River has always been an important feature of Silverdale. The tidal river was originally a ‘highway’ for both Māori and European settlers, until roading improvements of the 1920s affected the viability of waterborne transport. The name was corrupted to The Wade and then became Silverdale, as it is known today. This road name pays homage to Tangata Whenua.
Hinonga Loop (alternative 1)	Te Reo Māori word for enterprise or project. The subject site borders an array of successful locally owned and operated businesses. This naming acknowledges the significance of business innovations in Aotearoa.
Auahatanga Loop (alternative 2)	Te Reo Māori word for creativity. The subject site borders an array of successful locally owned and operated businesses. This naming acknowledges the significance kiwi creativity and ingenuity in business.

13. 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.

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

15. Road Type: ‘Loop’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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.

21. On 24 August and 7 September mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

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

• Ngāti Manuhiri (Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust)

• Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

• Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

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

• Ngāti Wai (Ngāti Wai Trust Board)

• Ngāti Whanaunga (Ngāti Whanaunga Incorporated)

• Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara (Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust).

22. By the close of the consultation period indicated in the guidelines, no mana whenua have identified an interest or responded to the request for feedback to date and the applicant has signaled a desire to proceed to a decision on the basis of the names supplied.

23. Noting the scale of the development and that the site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua, it is considered that a suitable period of time has been made available to receive commentary from mana whenua and, as no feedback has been received, the naming process can continue.

24. Notwithstanding the lack of response from mana whenua in this situation, the applicant has proposed Te Wēiti Loop as a naming preference, noting in support that: “Te Wēiti means little river or river bordered by cabbage trees. The Wēiti River has always been an important feature of Silverdale. The tidal river was originally a ‘highway’ for both Māori and European settlers, until roading improvements of the 1920s affected the viability of waterborne transport. The name was corrupted to The Wade and then became Silverdale, as it is known today. This road name pays homage to Tangata Whenua.” This commentary highlights the importance of the Wēiti river to both Maori and early European settlers as an historically significant ‘highway’. While the road being named here lies in relatively close proximity the Wēiti river, it is not a significant carriageway in the area, and it may be possible to utilise this road name within a more culturally and/or historically significant context at some time in the future and with mana whenua agreement. For these reasons, the recommendation attached to this report has suggested the first alternative name proposed by the applicant be utilised at this location. As noted previously, it remains for the local board to decide upon the suitability of any name within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

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 component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	165 Wainui Road Silverdale - Site Location Plans	215

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

[1] Refer Submitter Numbers 324, 450, 483, 499, 568, 573, 589, 607, 625, 659, 664, 666, 667, 817, 848, 859, 976, 984, 992, 1040, 1041, 1044, 1053, 1138, 1169, 1177, 1206, 1209, 1210, 1243, 1305, 1311, 1472, 1474, 1518 and 1612 in Attachment B.

[2] Refer Submitter Numbers 499, 848 and 1210 in Attachment B.

[3] Proposed prohibited areas with majority support were Pakuranga Community Hall, St Heliers Community Library and Hall, Leigh Library and Grounds, Ti Point Walkway, Warkworth Town Hall Grounds, Onetangi Cemetery, Waiheke Island Artworks, Entrance of Goldie Bush Walkway, Lopdell Hall and House, Sandys Parade and Highwic House.

[4] Proposed restricted area with majority support was Whisper Cove (adjacent roadside parking).

[5] For example, the proposal does not apply council controlled public place rules to land under the control of the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority or to internal signs not on or visible from council controlled public places or the Auckland transport system. The proposal does however apply rules to signs on marae that are visible from council controlled public places or Auckland transport system as these could have safety impacts.

[6] This included 61 individuals and 18 organisations.

[7] The decision-making responsibility for Te Arai Drainage District, the Okahuhura Drainage Area and the Glorit Drainage District was reallocated to the Governing Body on 9 December 2020 (GB/2020/140).

[8] For the 12-month period 1 July 2020 to 30 June 2021, compared to an average of the prior five years.

[9] Three waters refers to drinking water, wastewater, and storm water.

[10] National Policy Statement – Freshwater Management policy 3.5

[13] Streams, springs, rivers, lakes, wetlands, groundwater, estuaries, harbours.

Chairperson	Gary Brown
Deputy Chairperson	Victoria Short
Members	Andy Dunn
	Janet Fitzgerald, JP
	Gary Holmes
	Julia Parfitt, JP
	Alexis Poppelbaum
	Leanne Willis

Date	Time	Venue (subject to change)
Thursday 17 February, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 17 March, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 21 April, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 19 May, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 16 June, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 21 July, 2022	2.00pm	Local Board office, Browns Bay
Thursday 18 August, 2022	2.00pm	Council Chamber, Orewa
Thursday 15 September, 2022	2.00pm	Local Board office, Browns Bay

Author	Louise Healy - PA/Office Manager
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Author	Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager