I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board will be held on:
Date: Time: Venue:
|
Thursday 17 March 2022 2:00pm via Microsoft Teams |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
Chairperson |
Gary Brown |
|
Deputy Chairperson |
Victoria Short |
|
Members |
Andy Dunn |
|
|
Janet Fitzgerald, JP |
|
|
Gary Holmes |
|
|
Julia Parfitt, JP |
|
|
Alexis Poppelbaum |
|
|
Leanne Willis |
|
(Quorum 4 members)
|
|
Louise Healy Democracy Advisor
15 March 2022
Contact Telephone: 021 419 205 Email: louise.healy@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
1 Welcome 5
2 Apologies 5
3 Declaration of Interest 5
4 Confirmation of Minutes 5
5 Leave of Absence 5
6 Acknowledgements 5
7 Petitions 5
8 Deputations 5
8.1 Deputation: Metro Community Trust 5
9 Public Forum 6
10 Extraordinary Business 6
11 Millwater and Silverdale community provision investigation 7
12 Local board input to development of Auckland Transport’s Interim Speed Management Plan 43
13 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Work Programme Reallocations 2021/2022 49
14 Council-controlled Organisations Quarterly Update: Quarter Two, 2021-22 55
15 Approval for New Private Road Name for Subdivision at 285 Glenvar Road, Long Bay 83
16 Approval for New Private Road Name for Subdivision at 64 Glenvar Ridge Road, Long Bay 91
17 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board feedback on Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency's Penlink Tolling proposal 99
18 Members' Reports 105
19 Deputations update 117
20 Governance forward work calendar 143
21 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board workshop records 147
22 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.
Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 17 February 2022, as a true and correct record. |
At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests for acknowledgements had been received.
At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.
Te take mō te pūrongo Purpose of the report 1. Colin Roberts and Dave Adams have requested a deputation to inform the local board of the establishment of Metro Community Trust.
|
Ngā tūtohunga Recommendation/s That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board: a) thank Colin Roberts and Dave Adams from Metro Community Trust for their presentation and attendance.
|
Attachments a Metro Community Trust presentation........................................................... 157 |
A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.
At the close of the agenda no requests for public forum had been received.
Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,-
(i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:
“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Millwater and Silverdale community provision investigation
File No.: CP2022/02973
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To tautoko / endorse the findings of the community provision investigation for Millwater and Silverdale.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Action 52 of the Community Facilities Network Plan Action Plan directed staff to investigate community provision in Millwater and Silverdale. The purpose is to identify current or future gaps in services or facilities against the guidelines in the Community Facilities Network Plan.
3. The study area falls in the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area. Staff have also considered provision in the rural area directly to the west of the study area which sits in the Rodney Local Board area. This area is projected to experience significant growth and development over time. This growth is likely to influence the service provision requirements in Millwater and Silverdale. This report is also being considered by the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board at their 17 March 2022 meeting.
4. The key findings of the investigation are:
· projected population growth across the study area will place pressure on existing facilities
· existing provision is sufficient to support current and future demand for library, arts, community or venues for hire services in Millwater and Silverdale
· condition issues at Ōrewa Library need addressing and are programmed to be addressed to maintain library service provision
· existing provision is sufficient to support current and future demand for leisure and aquatic services in Millwater and Silverdale.
5. The recommended key move to address the findings is to:
· investigate opportunities to increase community access to schools and privately-owned pools and courts within the next five years.
6. There is a risk that the rate of growth will differ from projections. There are opportunities in later years to reassess provision and mitigate the impacts of unforeseen growth. It is recommended that a needs investigation be carried out when the population in the study area reaches 30,000.
7. Staff aim for the report to be considered by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee at their April 2022 meeting.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) tautoko / endorse the findings of the Auckland Council’s Millwater and Silverdale community provision investigation 2021 as follows:
Library, arts, and community services
i) residents within Millwater and Silverdale have access to community, library, arts and venues for hire services
ii) there are no anticipated gaps in the current provision of community, library, arts or venues for hire services within Millwater and Silverdale
iii) there are condition issues at Ōrewa Library, and without intervention the library may close, creating a gap in the network
Aquatic provision
iv) residents within Millwater and Silverdale have access to aquatic services at Stanmore Bay Leisure and Aquatic Centre, and to Northern Arena facility within a ten-kilometre catchment
v) there are no anticipated gaps in provision for aquatic services within the Millwater and Silverdale area
vi) the Rodney sub-study area is currently rural and there are no provision guidelines for aquatic services in rural areas
Recreation and leisure
vii) residents within Millwater and Silverdale have access to recreation and leisure services as the study area is within the catchment of at least one leisure facility
viii) several schools in the Millwater and Silverdale catchments provide community access to indoor and outdoor courts
ix) there are no anticipated gaps in provision for recreation and leisure services within the Millwater and Silverdale area and further community access may be negotiated in the future
b) tautoko / support the following key move as identified in the Millwater and Silverdale community provision investigation 2021:
i) investigate opportunities for increase community access to schools and privately-owned pools and courts within the next five years
Horopaki
Context
Background to the investigation into community provision
8. Community services, whether provided by Auckland Council or a third party, are an important part of delivering the outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050, notably Outcome 1: Belonging and participating. The Community Facilities Network Plan guides council’s investment in the provision of community services.
9. The community provision investigation for Millwater and Silverdale responds to the following action in the Community Facilities Network Plan Action Plan:
Action 52: Investigate community needs in Millwater and Silverdale, building on the findings and outcomes of previous research in the area. |
10. The purpose of the investigation is to determine present or future gaps in community services in Millwater and Silverdale.
The Millwater and Silverdale study area and its sub-catchment
11. The Millwater and Silverdale study area is approximately 8.2km² and represents 0.75 per cent of Auckland’s geographic area. It comprises the suburbs of Millwater North, Millwater South, Silverdale central and Kingsway (shown in red in Figure 1).
12. The rural area directly to the west of the study area is projected to experience significant growth and development over time. This growth is likely to influence the service provision requirements in Millwater and Silverdale. As such, an additional statistical area (shown in blue in Figure 1) has been included for analysis as a sub-catchment study area. It is referred to as the Rodney sub-catchment. Note that growth is only anticipated to occur in the eastern corner of the blue area, with the rest remaining mostly rural.
Figure 1: Millwater and Silverdale and the Rodney sub-catchment study areas
Note: Millwater and Silverdale study area shown in red, Rodney sub-catchment shown in blue
Methodology for investigation
13. To complete the investigation, staff conducted the following four streams of research:
· Community profile - provides an overview of the current state and likely future state of the study area using census data, growth data and other primary research.
· Social research summary - summarises the findings from recent social research, surveys community engagement to show how residents perceive and feel about their environment and their concerns and aspirations for Millwater and Silverdale.
· Community facility stocktake - identifies the network of existing facilities (council and non-council) in the study area and analyses available data on the current state including what is on offer, how it is being used, who is using it, and its condition.
· Gap analysis – analyses evidence from the community profile, social research and community facilities stock take. It assesses if current provision is sufficient to support demand and how it aligns with provision guidelines and desired national, regional and local outcomes. It determines if demand for services and facilities is likely to exceed supply and where and when this might occur.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
14. The high-level findings of the community needs investigation are provided below.
The population is young and diverse
15. A total of 19,750 people reside in Millwater and Silverdale and the Rodney sub-catchment (based on the 2018 Census), representing 1.2 per cent of Auckland’s total population. The characteristics of the population are summarised in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Characteristics of the population
The resident population base is relatively young. Most residents fall between the ages of 0-24 years and 25-44 years.
|
Most residents are in families and have young children. |
There is an even split between the number of residents born in New Zealand and those born overseas. |
Most residents identify as New Zealand European and Asian. The percentage of Asian residents within Millwater and Silverdale is growing. |
The median personal income for both study areas is higher than the Auckland average. |
For both study areas, approximately half of all residents are employed. |
58% of residents in Millwater and Silverdale are in privately owned houses.
|
Private vehicles are the dominant mode of transport within both study areas.
|
The population is growing as the area is being developed
16. Over the next thirty years, the study areas are projected to grow, as shown in Figure 3, to:
· 29,532 people by 2031 (or 1.5 per cent of Auckland population)
· 44,922 people by 2051 (or 1.9 per cent of Auckland population).
Figure 3: Projected population growth in the study areas
Source: Auckland Council’s population model i.11
Urbanisation of rural areas will result in changing needs for community services
17. Population growth in the study area is anticipated to occur in Silverdale and Millwater and the emerging suburb of Milldale (marked by the red circle in Figure 4). Parts of the Rodney sub-catchment is planned to become urbanised. The suburb of Milldale to the west of Millwater and Silverdale is zoned ‘future urban’ (yellow shading in Figure 4).
18. Urbanisation is anticipated to bring newly developed neighbourhoods, good quality housing, as well as improved transport links and employment opportunities.
19. The population is likely to have a high number of young families, working households, with increased ethnic diversity, particularly with an increase of those who identify as Asian.
20. This significant growth and changing demographics over the next 30 years will drive demand for new services and creates opportunity to better target services to increase participation in low user groups.
Figure 4: Planning zones for the study areas
Source: Auckland Council Geospatial services, 2021
Social research provides insights as to behaviours and aspirations
21. Recent relevant social research, surveys and engagement results provide useful insights as to the behaviours and aspirations of the Millwater and Silverdale community.
22. Key sources used include:
· Quality of Life Survey, 2018, The Quality of Life Project
· Sport and Recreation in the Lives of Young Aucklanders, 2011, Sport New Zealand
· The New Zealand Participation Survey 2017, Active NZ, Sport New Zealand
· Community engagement report for Silverdale 2020, Serious Play Works
· Hibiscus Coast Needs Assessment 2015, Point Research.
23. The key findings of this social research are outlined in Figures 5 and 6.
Figure 5: Community aspirations
|
Figure 6: Community behaviour
|
24. The social research concluded that the community feels that there is:
· a need for strengthening the sense of community - residents reported feelings of isolation and loneliness and expressed a desire for more community services and spaces in Millwater and Silverdale where people can gather and connect
· a lack of community infrastructure - residents raised concern over the current lack of community facilities in Millwater and Silverdale, particularly leisure and recreation facilities.
Existing community facilities
25. Communities within Millwater and Silverdale and the Rodney sub-catchment can access community services through existing community facilities in the study areas as well as those in adjacent areas.
26. The community facilities within Millwater and Silverdale are listed in Table 1 and community facilities within the Rodney sub-catchment in Table 2. The Rodney sub-catchment is rural at present, hence the limited number of facilities within the area.
Table 1: Community facilities within Millwater and Silverdale
Community facilities owned by Auckland Council |
Community facilities owned by private providers |
· Stoney Homestead Community Hub · Silverdale Hall In partnership with Auckland Council: · Te Herenga Waka o Ōrewa Marae
|
· One privately provided aquatic facility (Northern Arena Silverdale) · Four privately-owned venues for hire: o Saint John’s Hall o Northridge Country Lodge o Rotary House o Silverdale Rugby Club |
Table 2: Community facilities within the Rodney sub-catchment
Community facilities owned by Auckland Council |
Community facilities owned by private providers |
· Wainui Hall |
There are no privately provided facilities |
Gap analysis
27. The Community Facilities Network Plan details provision guidelines as well as provision approach for different types of spaces required in community facilities. They are summarised in Table 3.
Table 3: Provision guidelines to support gaps identification
Local arts and culture space |
Based on evidence of sustainable community demand |
Local community centres |
Within 15-minute walk from local or town centres or within 30-minute drive of rural and coastal centres Target population threshold 5,000 to 10,000 |
Venues for hire |
Within 15-minute walk from local or town centres or within 30-minute drive of rural and coastal centres |
Libraries space |
Capacity testing based on 41m2/1,000 population within a maximum distance of 30-minute travel |
Local pools and leisure space |
In areas outside catchments of existing facilities (i.e., 10 kilometres), recognising other providers Target population thresholds: for pools 35,000 to 50,000 – for leisure 18,000 to 40,000 |
28. Service provision was analysed against the provision guidelines in the Community Facilities Network Plan, a review of existing facilities, population projections, social research and community profiling to assess likely future demand and gaps over time.
29. Table 4 summarises the key conclusions from the gap analysis.
Table 4: Key conclusions
Demand and provision |
Likely future provision requirements |
Library, community, and arts services |
|
· Millwater and Silverdale residents expressed a desire for social/meeting spaces · There are several community facilities and venues for hire in the study areas · The existing facilities in and around Millwater and Silverdale are fit for purpose, providing spaces and services that cater for a range of community activities. However, there are condition issues at the Ōrewa library that needs attention · Residents within Millwater and Silverdale have sufficient access to community, library, arts and venues for hire services. Digital access to library services is growing. |
· There are currently no gaps in provision · There is capacity in existing facilities to support growth · The Ōrewa library should have the capacity to meet future demand, pending condition issues are attended to. |
Leisure and recreation services |
|
· Residents raised concern over the current lack of community facilities in Millwater and Silverdale, particularly leisure and recreation facilities · Millwater and Silverdale residents have access to at least one leisure facility within 10 kilometres · There are four schools with indoor and outdoor courts in proximity to Millwater and Silverdale. They provide a total of 44 indoor courts. The community has access to these courts at varying levels.
|
· There is no current requirement for additional indoor recreation space, given the National Strategy ratio for indoor courts (1:9000 people) · There is an opportunity to increase community access to school courts. |
Aquatic services |
|
· Millwater and Silverdale residents have access to Stanmore Bay Leisure and Aquatic Centre, and to Northern Arena facility within ten kilometres · Residents also travel to facilities in other catchments to access services. |
· There is no requirement for additional aquatic services at present · Auckland Council is currently reviewing provision guidelines for aquatic services. This work will provide further clarity as to network requirements. |
Recommended key move
30. Based on the gap analysis, the investigation concludes that current provision is sufficient to support immediate and future demand.
31. Staff recommend the following key move:
· investigate opportunities for increase community access to schools and privately-owned pools and courts within the next five years.
32. Staff also recommend investigating community provision again when the population within the study areas reaches 30,000. Auckland Council’s latest population projections estimate that this threshold will be reached by 2031. However, growth may be occurring faster than anticipated, notably driven by private plan changes. Staff propose to closely monitor population growth.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
33. The recommendations and key move focus on leveraging existing facility and service provision by schools and private providers and improving existing facilities. This ensures a sustainable approach to the provision of community services.
34. Auckland Council’s investment in walking and cycling infrastructure as well as in public transport foster opportunities to reduce reliance on private vehicle travel to access community services and facilities.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
35. The community provision investigation has been developed in consultation with relevant council departments including Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships, Park Sport and Recreation, Community Facilities and Local Board Services. Their views are reflected in the findings and conclusions of the investigation.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
36. Two workshop sessions were held with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board.
37. In September 2021, staff presented the draft findings of the investigation. Feedback from the local board focused on:
· prioritising access to community services via public transport
· investigating community service provision within Milldale to reduce Milldale residents’ reliance on community services in Millwater and Silverdale
· concern whether schools would be willing to provide wider community access to their court and aquatic facilities
· investigating funding options for a new recreation facility at Metro Park East to replace old Silverdale Bowls Club.
38. The investigation considered the local board’s feedback. Note that this investigation did not conclude a current future gap in recreation services. Hence the investigation of a new recreation facility is not a recommended key move.
39.
40. Staff are conducting a workshop with the Rodney Local Board ahead of their business meeting in March 2022.
41. The assessment areas of Millwater and Silverdale fall across the boundary of the Hibiscus and Bays and Rodney local boards. As population grows in these areas, and demand for services increases, is it likely that new services would be assessed for treatment as “multi-board services”, as proposed by the Governance Framework Review Service Levels and Funding project. This assessment would consider decision-making responsibility and funding capacity for those services.
42. Local views, behaviours and preferences were considered in the development of this investigation. Local communities benefit from accessing community services.
43. Improved community access to court and leisure services provided by schools and private providers would benefit the community.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
44. Māori identity and well-being is a key outcome in the Auckland Plan 2050.
45. Approximately 5.4 per cent of the Millwater and Silverdale resident population identify as Māori. The social research used to inform this investigation gathered views from a variety of residents in the study areas, including Māori.
46. The provision of community facilities and services in Millwater and Silverdale enable opportunities for residents who identify as Māori to participate in community and sport and recreation activities. This provision contributes towards Focus Area 1 of Auckland Plan: “Māori identity and well-being” - Meet the needs and support the aspirations of tamariki and their whanau and towards the social and cultural pou of the Independent Māori Statutory Board Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
47. There are no direct financial implications associated with this report.
48. The findings and recommendations of this investigation do not impact on existing and planned projects in the local board area.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
49. The demographic and growth projections may change. Staff will update the projections of this investigation when new growth modelling is produced, and new census information becomes available.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
50. The report will be considered by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for decision. The report will include the local board’s resolutions.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Millwater and Silverdale community provision summary findings |
19 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Katie Kim - Policy Advisor |
Authorisers |
Carole Canler - Senior Policy Manager Kataraina Maki - General Manager - Community and Social Policy Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
17 March 2022 |
|
Local board input to development of Auckland Transport’s Interim Speed Management Plan
File No.: CP2022/02365
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To seek early local board input to the development of Auckland Transport’s proposed interim Auckland Speed Management Plan.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Central government is committed to speed reductions and the ‘Vision Zero’ road safety policy and is considering implementing regulations that would require the creation of regional speed management plans.
3. Introduction of an interim Speed Management Plan meets the council’s direction to Auckland Transport to reduce road deaths and serious injuries, and to prepare to meet the proposed central government rules.
4. In December 2021, Auckland Transport advised all local boards about the development of an interim Auckland Speed Management Plan for the period 2023-2026. The plan will create a framework for setting new speed limits and will influence plans for related safety infrastructure across Auckland.
5. Prior to developing the interim Speed Management Plan, Auckland Transport is seeking input from local boards, specifically to identify a list of roads in each local board area that should be reviewed when staff develop the proposed plan.
6. The interim Speed Management Plan will be in place between 2023 and 2026. During 2023, consultation will begin on the first 10-year plan which is expected to be in place from 2024 to 2034.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) provide feedback on the introduction of an interim Auckland Speed Management Plan
b) provide a list of roads within the local board area that should be reviewed when staff develop the proposed plan.
Horopaki
Context
7. Auckland Transport (AT) has made speed limit changes covering 11 per cent of the road network, with changes to a further 27 per cent of the road network proposed. Each local board has received information detailing the roads in their area where changes are proposed under the first three phases of the Safe Speeds Programme.
8. The Interim Speed Management Plan will continue this process of expanding Auckland’s network of safer roads.
9. Between March and June 2022, AT will undertake an assessment to consider feedback from elected members, mana whenua, partners and the community against technical considerations related to benefit, cost, and risk. Several checks will then be made, including technical and legal reviews, and funding criteria. This work will inform the options that are presented as part of public consultation, planned to take place in late-2022.
Auckland Council Strategic Alignment
10. Auckland Council is committed to road safety. The Auckland Plan envisages a transport network free of deaths and serious injuries by 2050. AT deliver the council’s policies in relation to transport.
11. Auckland Transport developed ‘Vision Zero for Tāmaki Makaurau’ in response to goals within the Auckland Plan and with the council’s Planning Committee’s direction. The interim speed management plan is a key contribution to ‘Vision Zero for Tāmaki Makaurau’.
12. The interim Speed Management Plan encourages safer speeds that contribute to ‘Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan’ by making roads safer and encouraging greater use of more environmentally friendly transport modes, such as walking and cycling.
Central Government Alignment: Proposed Land Transport Rule on Setting Speed Limits
13. ‘Road to Zero’ is New Zealand’s road safety strategy; infrastructure improvements and speed management are its first focus areas. In 2021, Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency consulted on a proposed new ‘Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2021’.
14. The proposed changes include requirements for local authorities to develop speed management plans and set lower speed limits around schools to improve safety and encourage more children to use active modes of transport.
15. Central government is considering the proposed rule and a decision is expected in the second quarter of 2022. Waka Kotahi is expected to release a new speed management guide at the same time as the new rule, which will include updated safe and appropriate speed limit ranges for our roads and streets. Under the proposed rule, AT is required to consult on speed limit changes in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
16. Development of an interim Speed Management Plan is a long process, and this engagement is an early step. AT will engage with the public, other agencies and elected members throughout 2022.
17. The current round of local board consultation started in December 2021. In February and March 2022, AT attended workshops with local boards and is now inviting feedback, specifically about roads or areas where there is community demand for safer speeds.
18. Please note that where roads and schools are already included in conversations taking place within Tranche 2B of the previous speed limits programme, these should not be included in feedback on the interim Speed Management Plan.
19. Feedback from local boards will contribute to the development of a draft Speed Management Plan that AT will consult on in late 2022. Following public consultation, the AT Board will finalise and approve an interim Auckland Speed Management Plan 2023-2026.
20. The role of the local board is not to make technical decisions about speed management, but instead to provide the community’s perspective on local concerns and interests related to speed management.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
21. Auckland Transport engages closely with the council to develop strategies, actions, and measures that support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri the Auckland Climate Action Plan, and other council priorities.
22. Auckland Transport’s core role is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network. The primary climate change benefit of safe and appropriate speed limits is that they support and encourage greater take-up of walking, cycling and micro mobility by reducing the risk to vulnerable road users, making these modes safer and more attractive. This supports emissions reductions.
23. Recent surveys of town centres in which speed limits were reduced and safety improvements introduced in the first tranche of Auckland Transport’s speed limit changes demonstrated a link between slower speeds and more people walking or cycling. Surveys found that 19 per cent of local people now participate in at least one ‘active mode’ activity (for example, walking or cycling) more often since the projects have been completed. Increasing the number of people choosing to walk or cycle reduces emissions.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
24. Auckland Transport engages closely with the council on developing strategies, actions, and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri the Auckland Climate Action Plan and other council priorities.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
25. The new Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2022, once introduced, will require road controlling authorities to:
· reduce 40 per cent of their school speed limits by 2024, with all reductions completed by 2030
· include their proposed speed limit changes and safety infrastructure treatments (including proposed safety camera placements) for the coming 10 years into speed management plans
· implement a new consultation process that aligns with the three-year Regional Land Transport Planning (RLTP) consultation process.
26. The new rule will remove the requirement to set speed limits through bylaws, enabling a whole-of-network approach that considers safety-related infrastructure improvements, speed limit changes and safety camera placement together.
27. Taken together, these changes will have a significant impact on Auckland communities, and on the ways that Aucklanders input into decisions around safer speed limits.
28. In addition to the feedback local boards are invited to provide in response to this report, local boards will continue to be kept informed and up to date as this process progresses.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
29. Auckland Transport is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations in being more responsive to and inclusive of Māori.
30. Auckland Transport’s Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua iwi in Auckland to deliver effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions. AT also recognises mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about
31. Safe speeds make our roads safer for active road users, which encourages more people to walk, cycle and use public transport. Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau is the well-being framework developed by the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in response to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri. Safer roads contribute to more people walking or cycling, which in turn supports this framework developed by Mana Whenua.
32. Waka Kotahi’s 2021 study ‘He Pūrongo Whakahaumaru Huarahi Mō Ngā Iwi Māori – Māori Road Safety Outcomes’ provides data demonstrating that Māori are disproportionately more likely to be hurt or killed on New Zealand roads. The interim Speed Management Plan is expected to result in significant positive impacts for Auckland’s Māori communities.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
33. Providing feedback on the development of the interim Speed Management Plan has no financial implications for local boards.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
34. Providing feedback on the development of the interim Speed Management Plan does not present any risks for local boards.
35. There is a risk to Auckland Transport if the interim Speed Management Plan is not finalised in time to meet central government requirements. This risk has been mitigated by ensuring that development and engagement on the interim plan begins ahead of the Minister of Transport announcing their final decision on the proposed rule.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
36. Local board feedback will be used by AT to inform the development of the interim Speed Management Plan.
37. Between March and June 2022, Waka Kotahi will confirm that the new Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2022 has been approved by the Minister of Transport.
38. Between June and August 2022, AT will communicate to local boards how their feedback has been taken into account in the development of a draft plan.
39. In late 2022, AT will undertake public consultation on a draft version of the interim Speed Management Plan. The AT Board will then consider any recommended changes to the draft and approve an interim plan.
40. The interim Speed Management Plan will be in place between 2023 and 2026. During 2023, consultation will begin on the first 10-year plan which is expected to be in place from 2024 to 2034.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy |
Authorisers |
Louise Mason - GM Local Board Services Stephen Rainbow – Head of Community Engagement – Central Hub, Auckland Transport |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Work Programme Reallocations 2021/2022
File No.: CP2022/03033
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To approve reallocation of funding within the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board’s 2021/2022 work programme.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board approved its work programme 2021/2022 on 17 June 2021 (resolutions HB/2021/62 (Infrastructure and Environmental Services), HB/2021/163 (External Partnerships), and HB/2021/164 (Customer and Community Services).
3. As projects progress through the delivery process the specific work required and the cost of delivery can change. As a result, variations are sought to the work programme to ensure the local board’s locally driven initiatives operational budget is optimised.
4. The following activities within the work programme are tracking towards an underspend for the 2021/2022 financial year and have budget available for reallocation:
a) ID 3109: Hibiscus and Bays Māori naming: Parks and Places Tranche 1- $14,000
b) ID 214: Event Partnership fund - $5,500
c) Local Board Film income - $5,000
5. Underspend budget must be allocated to projects that can be completed by the end of the 2021/2022 financial year.
6. It is recommended that the underspend budget from the above initiatives is reallocated to support the following activities:
d) ID 64: Pest Plans on private land
e) ID 480: Restore Hibiscus and Bays Coordinator
f) ID 729: Trash Free Taiaotea programme
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) approve the reallocation of $24,500 underspend budget towards the following activities:
i) Infrastructure and Environmental Services - ID 64: Pest Plans on private land - $4,000
ii) Infrastructure and Environmental Services - ID 480: Restore Hibiscus and Bays Coordinator - $12,500
b) Infrastructure and Environmental Services - ID 729: Trash Free Taiaotea programme - $8,000
Horopaki
Context
7. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has an approved 2020/2021 work programme for the following operating departments:
· Customer and Community Services
· Infrastructure and Environmental Services
· External Partnerships.
8. The local board receives performance updates on the work programme throughout the year; the last report was presented at the February 2022 business meeting.
9. As projects progress through the delivery process the specific work required and the cost of delivery can change. As a result, variations are sought to the work programme to ensure the local board’s locally driven initiatives operational budget is optimised.
10. Underspent operational expenditure can be reallocated across departments but must remain as operational expenditure (i.e. it cannot not be used as capital expenditure), and should be reallocated on the basis that delivery can be achieved before the end of the financial year.
11. Any budget reallocated in the current financial year must be spent by 30 June 2022 otherwise it will be treated as savings.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Activities with underspends
12. Staff have identified two activities within the operational work programme that will deliver an underspend for the 2021/2022 financial year. Additionally, the local board have a Film Income budget to allocate. The total underspend amount to reallocate is $24,500.
13. The following table provides a breakdown of the underspend against each activity.
Table 1: Work programme underspend for reallocation by the local board
ID |
Work Programme Name |
Activity Name |
Reason for underspend |
Underspend amount |
3109 |
Customer and Community Services |
Hibiscus and Bays Maori naming: parks and places Tranche 1 |
Following the full completion of tranche one of this project, savings were identified. |
14,000 |
214 |
Customer and Community Services |
Event partnership fund |
Due to Covid-19 related impacts, the Rodders Festival in Orewa was cancelled. After operational costs were paid, a portion of the funds were returned. |
5,500 |
|
|
Local Board Film Income |
This income is received during the year and is therefore not allocated when the local board approves its work programme at the start of the year |
5,000 |
|
|
|
TOTAL |
$24,500 |
Activities to reallocate budget
14. Staff have identified the following activities, which can be delivered by the end of the 2021/2022 financial year, to reallocate budget.
Table 2: Activities to reallocate
ID |
Activity Name |
Activity Description / how budget will be spent |
Reallocation amount requested |
64 |
Pest Plans on private land |
This funding will support providing tools to landowners to help deliver the pest plans they receive. Friends of Ōkura Bush have lost their main source of funding over the last three years that the annual ‘Pestiville’ event has been cancelled, this additional funding will complement regional funding to support the delivery of the pest plans |
5,000 |
480 |
Restore Hibiscus and Bays Coordinator |
Support an additional Science Coordinator to help Restore Hibiscus and Bays in the development of their environmental monitoring plan. |
15,000 |
729 |
Trash Free Taiaotea programme |
This proposal would be an extension/another dimension for the Trash Free Taiaotea programme deliverables (in partnership with Hibiscus Coast Zero Waste to help deliver). |
16,000 |
|
|
TOTAL |
$36,000 |
15. While table 2 above outlines that these projects could potentially use $36,000, the funds are not available.
16. At the local board workshop on 24 February 2022, information was received about the potential impact of each project receiving less than the requested amount. At this workshop, the local board indicated that they supported all three projects. It was confirmed by staff that reducing the amount allocated to each activity would allow the project to continue, but at a reduced state.
17. For ID 729: Trash Free Taiaotea programme, $16,000 was requested for four projects in the following locations: Long Bay College, the new Orewa Community Garden, the Stillwater Community Garden, or Northcross Intermediate School. By funding two programmes this year, a project could be funded in each subdivision.
18. For ID 480: this supports a one-off contract to provide a science coordinator. Funding less than requested would enable the work to continue, but not as extensively. It is recommended that $12,500 be allocated to this programme.
19. For ID 64: it was noted by staff that any additional money would be useful for this initiative. Given the local boards declared position on the importance of addressing the ability of the Weiti Estuary to be restored, in order to protect the unique ecosystem as well as the adjoining Long Bay Marine Reserve, which is the receiving environment for the runoff from this estuary, an allocation of $4,000 is recommended.
20. This provides a balance over the projects as outlined below in Table 3.
Table 3: Recommended reallocation to each Activity
ID |
Activity Name |
Reallocation amount recommended |
64 |
Pest plans on private land |
4,000 |
480 |
Restore Hibiscus and Bays coordinator |
12,500 |
729 |
Trash free taiaotea programme |
8,000 |
|
TOTAL |
$24,500 |
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
21. The proposed work programme reallocation does not impact on the increase of greenhouse gas emissions.
22. The three programmes all contribute towards adapting to the impacts of climate change by ecological restoration, pest control or environmental education programmes.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
23. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to local boards. There are no further impacts to be considered with this reallocation of funding.
24. Relevant departments within Auckland Council have been consulted regarding the reallocations and no objections or concerns have been raised by delivery staff.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
25. The reallocation of funding within the local board’s work programme supports strong delivery and optimisation of the local board’s available budget for 2021/2022.
26. The nature of the reallocation aligns with the local board’s work programme and the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
27. Where aspects of the proposed work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on activities of importance to Māori then appropriate engagement will be undertaken.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
28. Reallocation of funding is regarded as a prudent step for the local board to take in order to optimise the locally driven initiatives (LDI) opex budget for the 2021/2022 financial year.
29. The activities recommended to receive funding align with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020.
30. Should the local board choose not to support the reallocation of the funding from the initiatives identified above, the funding would be offered up as budget savings.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
31. There is a risk that despite the reallocation, some of the budget remains unspent at the end of the financial year. However, delivery staff believe it is feasible to deliver the activities within the timeframes required, and the risk of non-delivery is considered to be low.
32. COVID-19 may interrupt the ability to deliver work programme activities. Delivery departments will endeavour to adapt work programme activities for delivery where feasible.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
33. The funding will be reallocated according to the local board’s resolution, and the relevant department will progress with the delivery of the next steps.
34. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 2021/2022 work programme will be updated to reflect the board’s formal decisions and any variations will be reflected from the quarter 3 performance report onwards.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Matthew Kerr - Senior Local Board Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Council-controlled Organisations Quarterly Update: Quarter Two, 2021-22
File No.: CP2022/02958
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To provide the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board with an update on Council-controlled Organisation work programme items in its area, along with updates to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Joint Council-controlled Organisation Engagement Plan.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. The 2021-22 Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) Local Board Joint Engagement Plans were agreed in 2021.
3. Updates are made to the engagement plan throughout the year to ensure the plan is up to date and fit for purpose.
4. An updated version of the engagement plan is provided as Attachment A to the agenda report.
5. Work programme updates from Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland and Watercare are provided as Attachments B-E to the agenda report.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) receive the Council-controlled Organisations Quarterly Report for Quarter Two 2021-22
b) approve updates to the Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022.
Horopaki
Context
6. Each local board has agreed an engagement approach with the four CCOs for the 2021-2022 local work programme.
7. While the local board approves the Joint CCO Engagement Plan each year, it remains a live document and CCOs are encouraged to keep the document up to date.
8. Changes are also proposed by Local Board Services, where improvements can be made to all 21 engagement plans, and to keep information up to date.
9. This report may include the following types of changes:
· Additional work programme items, and proposed engagement level
· Proposed changes to the engagement approach with the local board
· Proposed changes to the extent of community engagement.
10. In addition, the four CCOs provide a quarterly update on projects listed in the engagement plan.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Updates from Local Board Services
11. Updates have been made where there have been staff changes within Local Board Services or CCOs.
12. These changes are reflected in Attachment A – Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022.
Auckland Transport
13. Auckland Transport’s work programme updates for Quarter Two are provided as Attachment B.
Updates to the Auckland Transport work programme
14. These activities have been removed from the engagement plan following project completion:
· Hatfields Beach safety improvements (Community Safety Fund)
· Hibiscus Coast Highway, Orewa (Active Modes)
· Whangaparaoa Rd / Main St intersection improvements (Network Operations)
· Laurence St, Manly – bus stop upgrades (PT Infrastructure)
· Ladies Mile, Manly – bus stop upgrades (PT Infrastructure)
· Whangaparaoa Rd / Gulf Harbour Dr, Hobbs Bay –bus stop upgrades (PT Infrastructure).
Auckland Unlimited
15. Auckland Unlimited’s work programme updates for Quarter Two are provided as Attachment C.
Updates to the Auckland Unlimited work programme
Additional activities
16. These activities have been added since the last update, and are provided alongside the suggested engagement approach:
· Government COVID-19 support packages (Activate and Reactivating Tāmaki Makaurau)
· Sustainability Initiatives
· Skills and workforce: Pacific Skills Shift.
Eke Panuku Development Auckland
17. Eke Panuku’s work programme updates for Quarter Two are provided as Attachment D.
Updates to the Eke Panuku work programme
18. No updates have been made.
Watercare
19. Watercare’s work programme updates for Quarter Two are provided as Attachment E.
Updates to the Watercare work programme
20. No updates have been made.
Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
21. Updating the Joint CCO Engagement Plan between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have a direct impact on climate, however the projects it refers to will.
22. Each CCO must work within Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework and information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.
Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
23. Approving the updated Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022 is likely to have a positive impact on other parts of the council as well as between the respective CCOs within each local board area.
24. These plans will be shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes and will give council staff greater ongoing visibility of CCO work programmes.
Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
25. Local board engagement plans enable local boards to signal to CCOs those projects that are of greatest interest to the local board, and to ensure that engagement between the local board and the four CCOs is focussed on those priority areas.
26. Joint CCO engagement plans also give local boards the opportunity to communicate to CCOs which projects they expect to be of most interest to their communities.
Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori
Māori impact statement
27. Updating and adopting the Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022 may have a positive impact on local engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka.
28. While both CCOs and local boards have engagement programmes with Māori, the engagement plan will allow a more cohesive and coordinated approach to engagement, with more advance planning of how different parts of the community will be involved.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
29. The adoption of the Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.
30. Any financial implications or opportunities will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.
Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
31. It is likely that there will be changes made to work programme items in the engagement plan during the year, or to the level of engagement that the board or the community will have. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the document states clearly that it is subject to change, contains a table recording changes made since it was signed, and will be re-published on the local board agenda quarterly, to ensure public transparency.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
32. The local board will receive the next quarterly update for Quarter Three in June 2022.
33. A workshop will be held in April to begin development of a new engagement plan for 2022-23.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2021-2022 |
59 |
b⇩ |
Auckland Transport 2021-22 Q2 Report |
73 |
c⇩ |
Auckland Unlimited 2021-22 Q2 Report |
77 |
d⇩ |
Eke Panuku Development Auckland 2021-22 Q2 Report |
79 |
e⇩ |
Watercare 2021-22 Q2 Report |
81 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Kat Ashmead – Senior Advisor Operations and Policy |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Approval for New Private Road Name for Subdivision at 285 Glenvar Road, Long Bay
File No.: CP2022/02342
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To seek approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to name a private road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, (the Applicant), at 285 Glenvar Road, Long Bay.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. 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 Applicant shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the local board’s approval that set out the requirements and criteria of council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.
3. Templeton Long Bay North Limited has proposed the names presented below in order of preference for consideration by the local board:
Preferred Name |
Taku Close |
Mauru Close |
Huarahi Close |
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.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) approve the preferred road name Taku Close for the private road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, (the Applicant), at 285 Glenvar Road, Long Bay in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.
Horopaki
Context
5. The 9 residential lot subdivision, (Council Ref SUB60367733), currently under construction was approved on 11 June 2021.
6. Site and location plans of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A and B to the agenda report.
7. In accordance with the guidelines and standards, any road including private ways, commonly owned access lots, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.
8. The private road within the commonly owned access lot 100 shown on the scheme plan of subdivision in Attachment B to the agenda report is required to be named.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
9. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.
10. The guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:
· a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or
· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or
· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.
11. Templeton Long Bay North Limited has chosen names they consider appropriate for the subdivision. The names presented resulted from their consultation with mana whenua in response to their original suggested English names Wayside & Temperance and although not direct translations of their original English names have similar Maori meanings behind them. At the Applicants request Huarahi was a third name presented to them by Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust.
12. In this regard the names and their relevance are as detailed in the table below:
Proposed Names |
Meaning (as described by the applicant |
Taku Close (preferred) |
Maori word meaning edge “in context of road”. |
Mauru Close (alternative) |
There was a winery established at the top of Glenvar Road in the late 19th / early 20th century. The winery was closed in part due to the Temperance Movement who were against the consumption of alcohol. Mauru is a Maori translation of tempered, abated, moderated. |
Huarahi Close (alternative) |
Maori word meaning approach / method / road / street. |
13. 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. Land Information New Zealand has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.
15. The road type ‘Close’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road.
16. 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 not 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. In July 2021 Templeton Long Bay North Limited undertook consultation with 14 mana whenua groups identified on the council’s website as having an interest in the general area. Through that consultation Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust, in response to the English names suggested by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, (Wayside & Temperance), proposed Maori names which although not direct translations of the English names have similar Maori meanings behind them. At Templeton Long Bay North Limited’s request Huarahi was a third name presented by Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust and Templeton Long Bay North Limited formally submitted all names for consideration.
22. No other mana whenua groups responded to the consultation however that is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance. Not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
23. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.
24. 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
25. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
26. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
285 Glenvar Road Long Bay - Locality Map |
87 |
b⇩ |
285 Glenvar Road Long Bay - Scheme Plan of Subdivision |
89 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
John Benefield – Senior Subdivision Advisor, Orewa |
Authorisers |
David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Approval for New Private Road Name for Subdivision at 64 Glenvar Ridge Road, Long Bay
File No.: CP2022/02348
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To seek approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to name a private road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, (the Applicant), at 64 Glenvar Ridge Road, Long Bay.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. 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 Applicant shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the local board’s approval that set out the requirements and criteria of council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.
3. Templeton Long Bay North Limited has proposed the names presented below in order of preference for consideration by the local board:
Preferred Name |
Koiora Lane |
Kūkupa Lane |
Verglas Lane |
Palisade Lane |
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.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) approve the preferred road name Koiora Lane for the private road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, (the Applicant), at 64 Glenvar Ridge Road, Long Bay in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.
Horopaki
Context
5. The 51 residential lot subdivision, (Council Ref BUN60359896), currently under construction was approved on 18 February 2021.
6. Site and location plans of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A and B to the agenda report.
7. In accordance with the guidelines and standards, any road including private ways, commonly owned access lots, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.
8. The private road within commonly owned access lot 101 shown on the scheme plan of subdivision in Attachment B to the agenda report is required to be named.
Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu
Analysis and advice
9. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.
10. The guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Maori names being actively encouraged:
· a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or
· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or
· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.
11. Templeton Long Bay North Limited has chosen a suite of names they consider appropriate for the area. These include a mix of Maori and English names reflecting either the biodiversity of the wider area, an abstract reference to the subterranean soil structures and a retaining wall construction methodology undertaken in subdivision.
12. In this regard the names and their relevance are as detailed in the table below:
Proposed Names |
Meaning (as described by the applicant |
Koiora Lane (preferred) |
Koiora - Maori meaning for life / general biological terms loosely related to skinks, (mokomoko), found on site. |
Kūkupa Lane (alternative) |
Maori name for native pigeon. The Kūkupa was found within this area and further north. The Kūkupa was considered sacred to Ngati Manuhuri and its feathers are highly resourced by our kai-raranga (weavers). |
Verglas Lane (alternative) |
A thin layer of glaze ice on an exposed surface or rock as an abstract reference to the subterranean clay layers on the site underlaid by rock materials |
Palisade Lane (alternative)
|
A type of retaining wall construction used within the subdivision. |
13. All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by 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. Land Information New Zealand has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.
15. The road type Lane is an acceptable road type for the new private road.
16. 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. In May 2021 Templeton Long Bay North Limited undertook consultation with 14 mana whenua groups identified on the Councils website as having an interest in the general area. Through that consultation Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust did not support Templeton Long Bay North Limited’s names and suggested and preferred the use of the name Kūkupa which the Applicant has adopted as there first alternative name.
22. No other mana whenua groups responded to the consultation however that is often dependant on the scale of the development and its level of significance. Not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.
Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea
Financial implications
23. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for council.
24. 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
25. There are no significant risks to council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key part of the process.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
26. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
64 Glenvar Ridge Road Long Bay - Locality Map |
95 |
b⇩ |
64 Glenvar Ridge Road - Scheme Plan of Subdivision |
97 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
John Benefield – Senior Advisor, Orewa |
Authorisers |
David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board feedback on Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency's Penlink Tolling proposal
File No.: CP2022/02965
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To inform the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board of the final feedback provided to Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency for the proposal to toll the Penlink route in Whangaparāoa, approved under delegated authority by the local board chairperson.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. At its meeting of 19 August 2021, the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board resolved (resolution number) HB/2021/92 to delegate authority to the chairperson to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils.
3. Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency sought feedback on tolling the Penlink route through a public consultation process between 17 January and 13 February 2022. Information on the Public consultation on tolling can be found on the Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency website (nzta.govt.nz).
4. Following a joint briefing to the Rodney and Hibiscus and Bays Local Board members on the 3 February from Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency staff, the local board’s feedback in response to public consultation on the proposal to introduce tolling the Penlink route is being reported to the 17 March 2021 business meeting of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to ensure transparent decision-making.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) note the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board’s feedback (Attachment A to the agenda report) approved under delegation to the chairperson on the proposal to introduce tolling the Penlink route
b) oppose the proposal to toll the Penlink route, unless a bus lane/T2 lane is created along the shoulder lane.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board feedback |
101 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Matthew Kerr - Senior Local Board Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
17 March 2022 |
|
File No.: CP2022/02367
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To provide an opportunity for members to update the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board on matters they have been involved in over the last month.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. An opportunity for members of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to provide a report on their activities for the month.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) receive the reports from chairperson G Brown, deputy chairperson V Short and local board members A Dunn, A Poppelbaum and J Fitzgerald.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Member report - G Brown |
107 |
b⇩ |
Member report - V Short |
109 |
c⇩ |
Member report - A Dunn |
111 |
d⇩ |
Member report - A Poppelbaum |
113 |
e⇩ |
Member report - J Fitzgerald |
115 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
File No.: CP2022/02366
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. As part of its monthly community forum, Hibiscus and Bays Local Board has set aside time for deputations/presentations during which time members of the public can address the local board on matters within the local board’s delegated authority.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Under Standing Orders there is provision for deputations/presentations to the local board. Applications for deputations/presentations must be in writing setting forth the subject and be received by the Local Area Manager at least seven working days before the meeting concerned. Subsequently, requests for deputations are considered and approved by the local board chairperson.
3. Requests, matters arising and actions from the deputations/presentations are recorded and updated accordingly. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board deputations/presentations update is attached as attachment A to the agenda report.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) note the deputation update from February 2022.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Deputations update - February 2022 |
119 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
17 March 2022 |
|
Governance forward work calendar
File No.: CP2022/02368
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To present the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board with a governance forward work calendar.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. This report contains the governance forward work calendar, a schedule of items that will come before the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board over the coming months until the end of the electoral term. The governance forward work calendar for the local board is included in Attachment A to the agenda report.
3. The calendar aims to support local boards’ governance role by:
· ensuring advice on agendas and workshop material is driven by local board priorities
· clarifying what advice is required
· clarifying the rationale for reports.
4. The calendar will be updated every month. Each update will be reported back to business meetings. It is recognised that at times items will arise that are not programmed. Local board members are welcome to discuss changes to the calendar.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) note the governance forward work calendar.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Governance forward work calendar |
145 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board workshop records
File No.: CP2022/02369
Te take mō te pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. Attached are the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board workshop record for February 2022.
Recommendation/s
That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:
a) note the workshop records for February 2022.
Attachments
No. |
Title |
Page |
a⇩ |
Workshop records for February 2022 |
149 |
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
Author |
Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor |
Authoriser |
Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager |
Hibiscus and Bays Local Board 17 March 2022 |
|
Item 8.1 Attachment a Metro Community Trust presentation Page 157