Agenda of Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Grant of new licence to occupy to The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated for land at Stillwater Reserve, Stillwater

File No.: CP2022/04201

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new licence to occupy to The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated for land at Stillwater Reserve, 1A Duck Creek Road, Stillwater for the purposes of establishing and maintaining a community garden.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In May 2021, The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated applied to council for landowner approval to establish and maintain a community garden on a portion of Stillwater Reserve.

3. In September 2021, council staff prepared a memorandum for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board about the proposed landowner approval. The local board permitted the landowner approval by way of Officer Delegations.

4. The landowner approval is conditional on the association obtaining a community licence to occupy for the land. In September 2021 the association formally applied to council for a licence to occupy 770 square metres (more or less) of land at Stillwater Reserve.

5. In January 2022, council staff prepared a memorandum for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board informing and seeking informal approval around undertaking the statutory requirements (engagement with mana whenua and public notification) of the proposed licence to occupy.

6. All statutory requirements have been satisfied. As such, council staff recommend that the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board grant The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated a new licence to occupy for 770 square metres (more or less) of land at Stillwater Reserve, 1A Duck Creek Road, Stillwater.

7. The intent for the operation of the garden and associated activities indicates a strong community and ecological focus. In this instance, the consequential community benefit is obvious. As such, the association is not required to have a community outcomes plan appended as a schedule to its licence to occupy agreement.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) grant The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated a non-exclusive licence to occupy pursuant to the Reserves Act 1977 for 770 square metres (more or less) of land at Stillwater Reserve, 1A Duck Creek Road, Stillwater, legally described as Lot 188 DP 42684 (Attachment A to the agenda report) subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – five years with one right of renewal for five years commencing 22 April 2022

ii) rent - $1.00 per annum if demanded

b) note that The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated is not required to have a community outcomes plan appended as a schedule to its licence to occupy agreement.

c) note that all other terms and conditions will be in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Guidelines 2012 and The Reserves Act 1977.

Horopaki

Context

8. This report considers the licensing matters with respect to The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated proposed occupation of land at Stillwater Reserve.

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

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Land and non-exclusive licence to occupy

10. The land comprising Stillwater Reserve, 1A Duck Creek Road is held by Auckland Council in fee simple, legally described as Lot 188 Deposited Plan 42684, subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and classified as a recreation reserve.

11. In September 2021, The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated applied to council for landowner approval to set up a community garden on land at Stillwater Reserve. As the garden will be open to the community and without fixed assets, a licence to occupy is the best occupancy agreement for the proposal.

12. In accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, the standard term of tenure for a licence to occupy to a well-established group is an initial term of five years with a right of renewal for five years.

The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated

13. The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated (formerly The Stillwater Ratepayers and Residents Association Incorporated) was formed in 1958 and duly incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908 on 9 July 1963.

14. The association has a current community lease for the management and operation of the council-owned community hall on Stillwater Reserve. In September 2021, the association submitted a comprehensive application for a licence to occupy land at the rear of the hall for the purposes of establishing and maintaining a community garden.

Proposed new community garden

15. The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated application for a licence to occupy included the following information:

“This area of the reserve has been chosen as it is far enough away from the Stillwater Hall to not impact on existing recreational activities and events which happen there. Access to the area for the public is good. The grassed areas chosen are currently not being used and are mowed by council contractors. We feel the gardens will enhance the area by –

· Providing garden beds for the Stillwater Playgroup to use for teaching purposes

· Providing garden beds for the community to use to grow local produce and a way to engage together

· There will be educational opportunities to teach those new to gardening. This will involve food waste disposal with onsite composting and worm farming and ways to garden using water wisely. Members of the Stillwater Community Garden group are experienced gardeners with knowledge of organic and permaculture methods

· Walkways around the proposed gardens are currently under-used. By having more activity in the proposed garden area, it will become safer and more appealing for locals

· Planting of fruit trees will add to the existing plantings of trees and encourage more insects and birds to the area

· Community garden members will be controlling rodents and picking up litter which will benefit the wider area

“To establish the gardens, initial works will be required. This will involve construction of low raised garden beds which will be on top of the ground. Composting bins, an area to collect rainwater for use in the garden and a utility area for storage and seating will be set up. Garden soil will be bought in, initially. This work will take place for a few hours over one or two weekends. Impact on the public and the park will be minimal (if at all).”

Public notification

16. Prior to the Christmas break leasing staff sought advice from council’s legal team on the need to publicly notify the licence to occupy proposal. Legal confirmed that as the operative reserve management plan for Stillwater Recreation Reserve adopted by the former Rodney District Council on 3 August 2000 did not contemplate the proposal, public notification would be necessary.

17. To meet the statutory requirements, a public notice was placed in the North Shore Times on 3 March 2022 (Attachment B to the agenda report). The proposal was also advertised on the Auckland Council website. In accordance with the relevant statute, submitters were allowed one calendar month from the date of publication to make submissions or objections to the proposal.

18. During the submission period, council staff received two submissions, both in support of the non-exclusive licence to occupy (Attachment C to the agenda report).

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. The designated impact level of the recommended decision on Green House Gas emissions falls within the “no impact” category because the proposal is for planting and sustainable activities and does not introduce new sources of emissions.

21. By virtue of the activity and the proposed term of tenure climate change has an unlikely potential to impact in spite of the location being adjacent to an area identified for coastal inundation and flood prone areas (Attachment D to the agenda report).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. While processing the association’s application for landowner approval, council’s land advisory staff sought feedback from wider relevant council teams. No specific concerns were raised at this time.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. The recommendations within this report support the 2020 Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan outcomes as follows:

· Outcome 1 “a connected community”

· Outcome 3 “a protected and enhanced environment”

· Outcome 4 “open spaces to enjoy”.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. 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.

25. For the purposes of seeking feedback from mana whenua groups identified as having an interest in land in the local board geographical area, staff prepared a power point document containing detail on the proposed non-exclusive licence to occupy.

26. On 18 February 2022, staff emailed the document to key representatives for mana whenua as follows; Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Maru, Ngati Pāoa, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngātiwai, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Te Patu Kirikiri and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua. Staff have not received any feedback on the proposal.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. The costs associated with public notification about council’s intention to grant a new non-exclusive licence to occupy was approximately $615.00. This cost was borne by the Community Facilities Department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. As the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board permitted landowner approval and provided informal positive feedback to staff to undertake the required statutory processes, should it resolve not to grant the licence to occupy, this may be viewed as a lack of good faith.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. Subject to the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board granting the non-exclusive licence to occupy, council staff will prepare the relevant documentation for signing and sealing by The Stillwater Community Association Incorporated and subsequent execution by council.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	GIS aerial view showing licence to occupy area indicatively outlined in red	13
b ⇩	Public notice	15
c ⇩	Submissions received during the public notification period	17
d ⇩	GIS aerial view from Auckland Council's Hazard Viewer	19

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Karen Walby - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent decision memo: Orewa Boulevard stage 3 project budget reallocation	23
b ⇩	Orewa Boulevard stage 3 project report	25

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Work Programme Reallocations 2021/2022

File No.: CP2022/04696

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 213: Local civic events $9,500

b) ID 215 ANZAC $17,500

c) ID 1719: Community movies events $15,000

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 activity:

d) ID 280: Local community grants

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) approve the reallocation of $42,000 underspend budget towards the following activity:

i) Community and Customer Services - ID 280: Local community grants - $42,000

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 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 three activities within the operational work programme that will deliver an underspend for the 2021/2022 financial year. The total underspend amount to reallocate is $42,000.

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
213	Customer and Community Services	Local civic events	Due to COVID-19 related implications the planned engagement events could not take place.	$9,500
215	Customer and Community Services	ANZAC	Due to COVID-19 related implications the planned ANZAC services could not take place.	$17,500
1719	Customer and Community Services	Community movies events	Event cancelled in the East Coast Bays subdivision before funding was paid out.	$15,000
			TOTAL	$42,000

Activities to reallocate budget

14. Staff have identified the following activity, which can be delivered by the end of the 2021/2022 financial year, to reallocate budget.

Table 2: Activity to reallocate

ID	Work Programme Name	Activity Name	Activity Description / how budget will be spent	Reallocation amount requested
208	Customer and Community Services	Local community grants	To be spent in Round Two of the Local Contestable Grants Programme including the Facilities Grant.	$42,000
			TOTAL	$42,000

15. Due to time limitations and no capacity to workshop this item with the local board in April, a reallocation memo was distributed on 12 April 2022 and the local board indicated their support to receive a report at the April business meeting to resolve on the reallocation of funding.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16. The proposed work programme reallocation does not impact on the increase of greenhouse gas emissions.

17. The proposed reallocation work programme line partly contributes towards community group delivery on outcome three “A enhanced environment” of the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. 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.

19. 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

20. 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.

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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.

24. The activity recommended to receive funding aligns with the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Plan 2020.

25. Should the local board choose not to support the reallocation of the funding from the initiative identified above, the funding would be offered up as budget savings.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There is a low 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 spend the funding within the timeframes required.

27. COVID-19 may interrupt the ability for community groups to spend their contestable grant funding, however staff will seek local board support should groups require time extensions or if re-purposing of funding is required.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. 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.

29. 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.

Ngā tāpirihanga

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

21 April 2022

Auckland Transport - Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022

File No.: CP2022/04017

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board input on Auckland Transport’s proposed Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport proposes to use bylaw-making powers granted to Auckland Transport under the Local Government Act 2002 and the Land Transport Act 1998 to replace five existing, legacy bylaws with a new ‘Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw’.

3. A single bylaw encompassing all activities in the road corridor will make it easier for members of the public to find information about regulations, and for Auckland Transport to regulate activities in a consistent and appropriate way.

4. As part of developing the proposed bylaw, a consolidation and refresh of regulations will be undertaken, and new provisions may be proposed where appropriate.

5. Public consultation occurred in January and February 2022, and the new bylaw is expected to be operational in June 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the draft Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022 ahead of it being submitted to the Auckland Transport Board for final approval.

Horopaki

Context

6. There are five bylaws relating to activities in the road corridor that require an approval from Auckland Transport. These are:

· Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015

· Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013

· Rodney District Council General Bylaw 1998 Chapter Six Stock on Roads

· Franklin District Council Stock on Roads Bylaw

· Legacy Bylaw Provisions on Construction in the Road Corridor and Other Public Places 2015.

7. Auckland Transport has developed a draft bylaw to regulate activities within the road corridor that were previously covered under these bylaws, such as construction; trading, events, and filming; and livestock on roads.

8. The new bylaw should streamline processes and ensure activities across the road corridor are done so legally and safely and will be made under the bylaw-making powers granted to Auckland Transport under the Local Government Act 2002 and the Land Transport Act 1998.

9. The proposed bylaw is a consolidation and refresh of regulations in the above bylaws. New provisions may also be proposed where appropriate, for example to future proof for planned activities such as climate change adaptations.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. Of the five bylaws listed above, three have expired (Rodney and Franklin livestock bylaws, and Public Safety and Nuisance bylaw) and one will expire at the end of March 2022 (Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015). The legacy bylaw provisions on Construction in the Road Corridor and Other Public Places Bylaw - a combined legacy bylaw approved in 2015 which covers seven bylaws from pre-amalgamation councils – is due to expire in October 2022.

11. The existing bylaws do not cover everything they need to, because:

· they were written before some innovations, situations or issues emerged, or

· new operational issues have now been identified which need to be addressed to enable better management of the transport system.

12. The core components of the bylaw will be based on existing bylaw rules around activities in, on, under and above the road corridor to ensure that relevant activities are undertaken safely, without damaging Auckland Transport assets. The bylaw will also detail which approvals are required.

13. Key proposed changes to the bylaw are outlined in Attachment A to the agenda report and the full draft bylaw is included as Attachment B to the agenda report.

14. Where possible, Auckland Transport intends to future-proof bylaws to allow for strategic outcomes and activities, such as changes to who uses parts of the road corridor.

15. In addition, the ability to set fees and charges or reclaim costs associated with permits, licenses, leases, inspections, investigations, or enforcement will be included where appropriate.

Public consultation

16. Auckland Transport undertook engagement with the public in January and February 2022, by distributing information to all database contacts including Business Improvement Districts and advisory boards. A letter was posted to rural livestock owners.

17. An electronic survey was advertised using social media and media releases.

18. Facilitated focus groups were conducted with industry leaders and representatives from the following groups:

· construction and traffic management

· events and filming

· trading (including micro-mobility, mobile vendors and performers)

· livestock.

19. Written submissions were invited, and seven people spoke to a hearings panel.

20. A more detailed review of public engagement and the emergent themes was supplied to local boards in mid-March and is included as Attachment C to the agenda report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. Auckland Transport is strongly committed to providing alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the wider transport network by encouraging use of electric vehicles, use of non-car transport and public transport.

22. This bylaw contributes directly to these goals, including new provisions for managing electric vehicle parking and better regulating micro-mobility (i.e. electric scooters), both of which will directly lower emissions.

23. Further, the bylaw seeks to address some of the issues currently experienced managing traffic around filming, events and work in the road corridor. Better traffic management improves the efficiency all types of transport, reducing carbon emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. Officers from Auckland Transport and Auckland Council worked together to develop the draft bylaw and investigated two options to make sure that Auckland Transport and Auckland Council bylaws remain compatible, and avoid regulatory gaps:

· option one was for both organisations to develop ‘mirror’ bylaws, which are identical, and then each entity just enforces the aspects under their respective legal remits

· option two was for each organisation to develop ‘zipper’ style bylaws, where each bylaw covers the aspects under control of the organisation, and the two bylaws together cover the full needs with no overlap.

25. The ‘Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw’ has utilised the ‘zipper’ approach as:

· the bylaw relates to approval processes for activities within the transport network (for example, construction of a vehicle crossing or running a mobile stall); and

· Auckland Transport’s mandate for bylaws is much narrower than Auckland Council’s. ‘Zipper’ bylaws allow fewer, clearer, and more succinct bylaws that are consistent across activities; and

· Auckland Transport can still delegate enforcement powers to Auckland Council, e.g., for permitting micro-mobility providers.

26. Provisions relating to trading, events and filming have been aligned with the Auckland Council Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, which takes effect from 26 February 2022 and regulates similar activities in public places other than the road corridor.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27. This report is to formalise local board feedback on the draft bylaw.

28. Local board members were invited to attend an online briefing for local boards on 18 February 2022. In addition, local board workshops with subject matter experts were organised for boards that requested one.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. Both Auckland Transport and Auckland Council are committed to meeting their responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi) and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori. Auckland Transport’s Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. Auckland Transport also recognise 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

30. The actions being considered are likely to have few specific impacts on Māori, because the bylaw consolidates a number of existing bylaws into one new bylaw. Further, the bylaw changes do not impact on land or water rather on behaviours so do not impact on Māori kaitiakitanga of these resources.

31. At the time this report was written, specific Māori engagement is being undertaken. Representatives of mana whenua tribes have been contacted and hui are currently underway. This feedback is not currently available but will be included in the information provided to the Auckland Transport Board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

32. There are no financial implications for local boards providing feedback on the proposed bylaw.

33. For Auckland Transport, this bylaw will have limited financial impact. The bylaw consolidates existing bylaws into one bylaw and does not create significant new revenue streams, nor public expenditure.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

34. Three of the bylaws have expired and a fourth is due to expire in 2022. Without a replacement bylaw, Auckland Transport does not have the legal right to give approval for activities in the road corridor or enforce certain behaviours on the road network. For example, Auckland Council’s current regulation of public hire micro-mobility devices is regulated through the Auckland Transport Trading and Events in Public Places Bylaw 2015, which expires at the end of March 2022.

35. Although Auckland Transport will not be able to have this new bylaw in place before the end of March the aim is to mitigate risk by getting approval as quickly as possible.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

36. Based on feedback received from local boards, iwi and through the public consultation, Auckland Transport staff will make recommendations to the Auckland Transport Board on any proposed changes to the draft bylaw.

37. The Auckland Transport Board will decide in May 2022 whether to go ahead with the changes to the draft bylaw as proposed.

38. The Activities in the Road Corridor bylaw is expected to become operative in June 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Quick guide – Activities in the road corridor bylaw 2022	39
b ⇩	Draft bylaw – Activities in the road corridor	45
c ⇩	Consultation report – Activities in the road corridor	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Andrew McGill – Head of Integrated Network Planning, Auckland Transport

Authoriser

Louise Mason – General Manager, Local Board Services

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Approval for New Public Road Name for Subdivision at 12 Kumukumu Road, Long Bay

File No.: CP2022/04232

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board to name the public road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, at 12 Kumukumu 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 the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region.

3. Templeton Long Bay North Limited (the applicant) has proposed the names presented below in order of preference for consideration by the local board:

Preferred Name

Waitai Close (preferred)

Kākano Close (alternative one)

Okura Close (alternative two)

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.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) Approve the preferred road name Waitai Close for the eastern cul-de-sac leg of the public road within the subdivision being undertaken by Templeton Long Bay North Limited, at 12 Kumukumu Road, Long Bay in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974.

Horopaki

Context

5. The 60 residential lot subdivision, (Council Ref BUN6037894), currently under construction was approved on 14 October 2021.

6. A location plan and scheme of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A & B to the agenda report.

7. In accordance with the guidelines and standards any new public road requires a road name.

8. The public road is shown as Lot 100 Road to Vest on the scheme plan of subdivision in Attachment B is required to be named.

9. Lot 100 shows a south / north road extending from Kumukumu Road which will be named Tupa Street as a continuation of the existing road already named as such and an eastern cul-de-sac road which is now being named through this application.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. 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

11. 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.

12. 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 or geographical features of the wider area with Maori translations of English words describing these features.

13. In this regard the names and their relevance are as detailed in the table below;

Proposed Names	Meaning (as described by the applicant
Waitai Close (preferred)	Maori word meaning sea water
Kākano Close (alternative)	Maori word meaning seed / new beginning
Okura Marine Close (alternative)	Geographical reference to the adjoining Marine reserve

14. 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.

15. Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed all the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

16. The road type Close is an acceptable road type for the new road.

17. 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

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. The decision sought for this report 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

20. 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

21. 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.

22. In November 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 did not support the Applicants original names and suggested the names Waitai and Kākano as alternatives. The Applicant has adopted these alternative names for the local boards consideration.

23. 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

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

25. 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

26. 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

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	12 Kumukumu Road - Scheme Plan of Subdivision	79
b ⇩	12 Kumukumu Road Long Bay - Locality Map	81

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

John Benefield – Senior Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Local board feedback on the draft 2021 Regional Parks Management Plan

File No.: CP2022/03962

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable local boards to provide formal written feedback to the draft Regional Parks Management Plan hearings panel.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Parks, Arts, Community and Events (PACE) Committee approved the draft Regional Parks Management Plan (draft plan) for public consultation on 2 December 2021. Through the 12-week public consultation period from 10 December 2021 to 4 March 2022, 4684 submissions were received from individuals, organisations and mana whenua. A summary of the submissions received is in Attachment A to the agenda report and submitters identified by local board area are in Attachment D to the agenda report. Local boards can use Attachment D to find local board specific submissions on the review’s hearings page^{^[1]}.

3. The draft plan provides a policy framework to manage the use, protection and development of 28 regional parks. Mutukaroa / Hamlins Hill Regional Park, a portion of the Hūnua Ranges Regional Park called the Hūnua Falls Special Management Zone and the Botanic Gardens have been excluded from the draft plan.

4. The draft plan presents the vision, values, management framework, general policies, and specific information and management intentions for each park. It provides a management response to key areas of focus, including:

· increased involvement of mana whenua in accordance with te Tiriti partnership principle

· adaptation to, and mitigation of, climate change on regional parks

· focus on biodiversity protection

· adding value to visitor experiences

· acknowledging that collaboration with others is increasingly important to achieve the aspirations of this draft plan.

5. In preparing the draft plan, staff considered the suggestions and input from mana whenua, local boards, community and organisations as required under the Reserves Act 1977 and Local Government Act 2002 and reviewed legislative requirements and current council policy.

6. Of the 4684 written submissions received within the submission period , more than 3830 submissions were generated from a campaign website (www.handsoff.nz) through which 3646 people sent an identical submission. Commentators on mainstream and social media claimed the draft plan hid an intention to transfer control of regional parks without proper consultation to either the Hauraki Gulf Forum or to iwi authorities. This raised concern for many people and prompted them to submit via the campaign website.

7. The proposal in the draft plan to investigate joining relevant parks to the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park does not lead to transfer of control to the Hauraki Gulf Forum, even under the legislative changes being proposed by the Forum. No transfer of control away from the council is proposed in the draft plan.

8. Some other groupings of identical submission points were submitted by motor campervan users, the Waitākere community and the Pakiri community.

9. Across all submissions a large variety of comments were received, between them commenting on all chapters of the draft plan, with varying levels of support and criticism.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) receive the public feedback on the draft 2021 Regional Parks Management Plan

b) provide formal feedback on the draft 2021 Regional Park Management Plan to the hearings panel

c) appoint local board members to speak to the hearings panel on the boards feedback in b) on 9 May 2022.

Horopaki

Context

10. The PACE committee has decision-making responsibility over the regional parks as identified in Schedule 1 to the Allocation of Decision-Making Responsibility Table in the Long-term Plan.

11. Under the Reserves Act 1977 and Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008, the 2010 Regional Parks Management Plan was due for review.

12. In August 2020 the PACE committee notified an intention to prepare a new plan (PAC/2020/36). The council sought suggestions from the community (in September and October 2020) as required under the Reserves Act. A summary of the suggestions was provided to elected members including local board members in December 2020.

13. Following the agreed principles for local board involvement in regional policies, all local boards were invited to input their suggestions for the review (January-March 2021). Local boards are invited now to review submissions on the draft plan and provide feedback to the hearings panel. Interested local boards held workshops earlier in April 2022 prior to this business meeting.

14. Engagement with 16 mana whenua and the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum occurred throughout the preparation of the draft plan, to meet Reserves Act requirements to give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and to align to the council’s commitments to improving Māori outcomes.

15. The draft plan is intended to serve as the reserve management plan for the regional parkland that is held under the Reserves Act 1977 (noting the exclusions outlined in paragraph 22).

16. Under s 41(3) of the Reserves Act, the plan must adequately incorporate and ensure the use and management of the reserve is aligned to the purposes for which it is classified and ensure compliance with the principles set out under the relevant classification in the Act.

17. It also fulfils the requirement for a management plan for the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park under s19 of the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008. The council must give effect to the Act and its objectives when preparing the plan for the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park.

18. Regional parkland that is not held under the Reserves Act is held under the Local Government Act 2002, for which this is a discretionary plan.

19. The Regulatory Committee appointed hearings panel members at its meeting on 14 December 2021. The hearings panel members are: Councillor Linda Cooper (chair), Councillor Christine Fletcher, Independent Māori Statutory Board Member Glenn Wilcox, independent David Hill, independent James Whetu.

20. Once finalised the draft plan will replace the 2010 plan. The timeline and process from here is provided later in this report. The intention is to finalise the plan for adoption in this political term.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The draft Regional Parks Management Plan

The draft plan covers 28 regional parks with some exclusions

21. The draft plan provides a policy framework to manage the use, protection and development of 28 regional parks. The PACE Committee resolved to exclude the Auckland Botanic Gardens (Resolution number PAC/2020/36) and the Mutukaroa / Hamlins Hill Regional Park and Hūnua Falls area of the Hūnua Ranges Regional Park (Resolution number PAC/2021/69) from this omnibus plan for these reasons.

· the Botanic Gardens is a different type of regional park and will have its own management plan

· a management trust established to govern the Crown-owned portion of Mutukaroa / Hamlins Hill is not currently active, and is subject to Treaty settlements, so it was not possible to develop a plan chapter at this point

· a significant part of the Hūnua Falls area is subject to completed and pending Treaty settlements which transfer land from the Crown to iwi but retain the council as the administering body. The council must jointly prepare part of this land with its iwi owner, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki. A larger part of Crown-owned land in the same vicinity is subject to similar Treaty settlement legislation with four future iwi owners (Ngāi Tai, Ngāti Paoa, Ngaati Whanaunga and Ngāi Koheriki) once all four settlements are completed. These areas and the arrival area to the falls have been excluded from the draft plan.

Consideration of suggestions

22. Local boards provided 245 suggestion points, which were considered in drafting the plan (see Attachments B and C to the agenda report).

23. From the first round of public consultation during September and October 2020, 789 submitters including 53 organisations and a petition from 3681 petitioners provided suggestions and comments to be considered in the council’s review.

24. Full consideration was given to the thousands of individual suggestion points in preparing the draft plan. Particular interest came from submissions relating to track closures in the Waitākere Ranges, dogs, conflicts between vehicle users and others on Muriwai beach, requests for more recreational activities, and a petition seeking the end to the killing of farmed animals for animal rights reasons.

Outline

25. The draft plan structure is as follows.

· book one: context, vision, values, a management framework and general policies

· book two: a chapter for each of 28 regional parks, including park vision and description, mana whenua associations, recreational provision, challenges and opportunities, management intentions and key stakeholders

· maps to illustrate the parks

· appendices: most of the appendices provide supporting factual information. Appendix 4 presents track development principles and criteria for development of new tracks.

26. The full draft plan runs to 508 pages with 60 maps. Due to its size, it is not appended to this report. The draft plan may be downloaded in full or in part at https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/regional-parks-management-plan

Key points

27. Through this draft plan the regional parks will remain under Auckland Council control as the treasured taonga of Tāmaki Makaurau. Concerns were raised by commentators in mainstream and social media during the consultation period in January-February 2022 suggesting the draft plan proposed to transfer some regional parks to the Hauraki Gulf Forum. These concerns are misplaced. The proposal in the draft plan to investigate joining relevant parks to the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park does not lead to transfer of control to the Hauraki Gulf Forum, even under the legislative changes being proposed by the Forum. No transfer of control away from the council is proposed in the draft plan.

28. The plan safeguards the natural, undeveloped feel of the regional parks that people have consistently told us they value and enjoy. Aucklanders will retain free access to opportunities to explore and enjoy our unique and stunning coastline, forests and farmland.

29. However, the draft plan notes that the context of park management is changing. Mana whenua have expressed that they want to be involved in park management at all levels. The need to protect biodiversity is more important than ever in the face of climate change and population growth pressures. We need to reorient our activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on parks as in other aspects of council’s business. At the same time Aucklanders want to enjoy these special places in ever greater numbers, and the council faces increasing pressures to do more with limited resources.

Proposals in the draft plan

30. The draft plan responds to the changing context by:

· seeking to follow the partnership principle under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, setting a course to work with mana whenua at management, project and operational levels

· mitigating and preparing for climate change by:

- keeping 35,000ha of forest healthy

- aiming to reduce visitor vehicle emissions

- revegetating 200ha of retired farmland

- referencing council’s shoreline adaptation plans and council’s biodiversity work to face increased drought, fire risk, and hotter temperatures

- providing more shade and shelter for visitors and animals

· seeking to protect the unique precious biodiversity in our regional parks by:

- following the direction set by our scientists on regional priorities

- implementing pest control programmes

- continuing to protect kauri from kauri dieback disease

- supporting the significant contributions made by conservation volunteers

· continuing to recognise and protect the cultural heritage on regional parks, which is of significant value to mana whenua and to Aucklanders

· responding to recreation requests by prioritising:

- track network planning in the Waitākere Ranges to identify next steps beyond the existing track reopening programme

- recreation planning to unlock the potential opportunities in the Hūnua Ranges

- planning for expected rapid growth in visitor numbers at Te Ārai

- providing for other opportunities across the regional parks network

· responding to the growing population and increasing diversity of Aucklanders by:

- seeking to cater for different cultural needs where we can safely do so

- aiming to provide more information about heritage and nature to build understanding and a sense of identity and connection

- continuing education programmes and supporting others to deliver also

· overcoming budget limitations by seeking to collaborate with others to deliver the outcomes of this plan, including reviewing the commercial activities framework.

31. The draft plan aligns to, and references, current council policies, strategies and programmes, noting management of regional parks touches on many areas of council policy and activity.

Public consultation on the draft plan

32. As required by section 41(6) of the Reserves Act (for land held under that Act), the draft plan was open for public consultation from 10 December 2021 to 4 March 2022. The Reserves Act provides for written comments from submitters followed by hearings.

33. Given the high level of interest in this draft plan, the consultation period was publicised widely through council channels, emails to mana whenua, previous submitters and a wide list of regional park stakeholders, via social media, on regional parks and through leisure centres. Hard copies were available in a number of libraries and in the Arataki Visitor Centre and a public online briefing was held.

34. The consultation also followed the special consultative procedure under s.83 of the Local Government Act 2002, noting that a summary was not required under s.87(2)(a). The requirement to adopt the special consultative procedure stems from the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008 and applies to the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park.

Submissions received

35. Some 4684 written submissions (excluding duplicates) were received within the submission period including from mana whenua, individuals, and 82 organisations. Of those more than 3830 submissions were generated from a campaign website of which 3646 were identical.

36. The table shows the number of submissions and identical campaign submissions received by local board area (where this information was provided). Attachment D lists submitters (other than the identical form submitters) who provided their local board area or postal code. The full list including campaign form submitter names is published on the hearings page.

Table 1: Number of submissions by local board area^{^[2]}

Local board area	Number of 'unique' submissions	Number of repeat campaign submissions
Albert-Eden	56	99
Aotea / Great Barrier	2	0
Devonport-Takapuna	40	130
Franklin	40	208
Henderson-Massey	21	31
Hibiscus and Bays	112	350
Howick	23	184
Kaipātiki	19	100
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu	7	10
Manurewa	2	45
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki	19	117
Ōrākei	41	271
Ōtara-Papatoetoe	1	10
Papakura	7	43
Puketāpapa	10	31
Rodney	172	241
Upper Harbour	20	117
Waiheke	19	72
Waitākere Ranges	166	114
Waitematā	25	106
Whau	18	37
Outside Auckland	73	1313
Location not provided	112	17
Regional / national organisations	33	0
Totals	1038	3646
Grand total		4684

37. Thousands of comments (supportive and critical) were received, covering many parts of the draft plan. The summary of submissions presents an overview of:

· responses to the feedback form questions

· emailed comments on the general sections of the draft plan

· all comments relating to each regional park chapter.

38. Four groupings of submitters presented the same or similar comments. These were in respect to:

· seeking continued council control of regional parks (the campaign submission)

· opposition to aspects of the draft plan in respect to Waitākere Ranges Regional Park, including:

- seeking access to closed tracks and seeking to not be excluded from the central part of the forest long-term

- seeking changes to reinstate aspects of the 2010 management plan for the park including the 2010 vision

- opposition to any proposals that might facilitate increased numbers of visitors and change the wilderness aspect of the park

· more opportunities for overnight stays for self-contained certified campervans from campervan users

· local community views on Pakiri Regional Park.

39. All submissions are publicly viewable on the council’s hearings page at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/have-your-say/hearings/find-hearing/Pages/Hearing-documents.aspx?HearingId=526.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

40. The draft plan aims to embed the mitigation and adaptation policies from Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan. The proposed adaptation and mitigation policies are outlined in paragraph 30. The expected impact of the mitigation policies will be to gradually reduce emissions associated with farming and visitor vehicles over time, and to retain and increase the carbon stored in permanent indigenous forest.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

41. Advice from staff across the council group helped to draft this plan including from:

· Parks, Sport and Recreation in particular regional parks and visitor experience

· Community Facilities in particular land advisory, farming and sustainability

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services including coastal, biosecurity, natural environment teams

· Auckland Plan Strategy and Research including the chief sustainability office, strategic advice, natural environment strategy and Hauraki Gulf

· Ngā Matarae / Māori Outcomes

· Plans and Places in particular heritage

· Community and Social Policy.

42. Auckland Transport, Auckland Unlimited (Screen Auckland in particular) and Watercare were engaged over aspects of the draft plan relevant to their roles.

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

Local impacts and local board views

43. A summary of all the submissions received from the community and organisations is in Attachment A.

44. Attachment B provides the collated local board suggestions for the review from March 2021. Attachment C presents the common themes from local boards’ input and the draft plan response.

45. A list of submitters by local board area (where known) is in Attachment D.

46. This report is presented to enable local boards to include comments on the draft plan for the hearing panel, following workshops earlier this month of April 2022. The hearings panel has set aside Monday 9 May to listen to local board representatives.

47. Local boards will be provided with updates on the hearings panel report and PACE committee decisions.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48. The Reserves Act is one of the acts in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. In performing functions and duties under the Reserves Act, the council must give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

49. Treaty obligations are overarching and not something to be considered or applied after all other matters are considered.

50. The draft plan acknowledges council’s obligation to iwi in relation to Te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi in regional parks management planning. In developing the draft plan council aimed to honour these obligations.

51. The draft plan’s intentions to involve mana whenua in park management and acknowledgement of mana whenua associations with regional parkland, impact positively on mana whenua and council’s commitments to improve Māori outcomes (in particular Kia ora Tāmaki and Kia ora Te Taiao, which relates to the role of Māori as kaitiaki).

52. Sixteen of the 19 mana whenua in the region and the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum, formerly the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum, engaged during the drafting of the plan.

53. Mana whenua aspire to a more substantive role including co-governance and co-management. The role of mana whenua with respect to regional parks and how the draft plan portrays mana whenua and partnerships was the most highlighted point across all mana whenua engagement. The Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum sought clarity on how the council views its partnership role, in particular seeking co-governance for mana whenua of the regional parks. It also sought recognition of case law that confirmed mana whenua priority for business opportunities on Reserves Act land.

54. In chapter one the draft plan identifies that governance of the regional parks rests with the council’s governing body. While it does not provide for co-governance of the regional parks, the draft plan acknowledges that this is part of a broader discussion.

55. The policy chapter titled Mana Whenua Partnerships provides for potential co-management acknowledging paragraph 60) but does not specify how this should occur, as there are a variety of emerging models of co-management. Given the number of iwi involved and the variety of associations with different regional parks it would not be appropriate to specify models in this plan. This chapter includes policies aligning to council’s commitment to improve Māori outcomes and to address mana whenua aspirations as outlined in the Issues of Significance 2021-2025, including:

· setting an enabling framework to build partnerships at all levels

· enabling an expanded mana whenua role beyond cultural heritage; the draft plan reflects mana whenua interest in all areas of park management

· supporting a Māori identity on parks and Māori wellbeing including through park naming (the draft plan reflects the decisions made by this committee on 11 November inviting mana whenua to provide Māori names for six parks (PAC/2021/61).

56. The first management intention in each park chapter is to work with mana whenua to explore their priorities and involvement in delivering the intentions for that park.

57. Several mana whenua and the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Forum submitted on the draft plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

58. There are no cost implications arising from local board feedback.

59. Costs relating to the review are covered from the project budget. Hearings’ commissioner costs are met from existing operational budgets.

60. This draft plan sets aspirations for the care, management and use of regional parks. The policies and management intentions are not costed nor prioritised and in many cases they are aspirational. The draft plan provides for the regional community to partner in support of council to deliver the outcomes in the plan.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

61. The following table outlines relevant risks and mitigations.

Risk	Mitigation
The draft plan sets out ambitions that exceed the current budget. There is a risk that it will raise expectations beyond current resource capacity in the Long-term Plan.	The draft plan explicitly identifies the intentions are not fully funded and explains funding decisions are through the Long-term Plan and annual budgets. It opens the door to collaboration with and resourcing by others and notes plan delivery will involve setting priorities across its wider portfolio and is impacted by changes to budget and revenue, such as impacts from Covid-19.
Many suggestions and submissions relate to issues that are beyond the scope of the plan and are not addressed, raising the risk that people think the council is not responsive.	Continue to communicate that the plan covers matters relating to the management of the regional parks covered by the plan, setting the scene for management for the next decade.
If the correct processes under the Reserves Act 1977 and other legislation are not followed, the review process could be open to challenge.	· confirm the legal status of regional park land holdings and check the statutory and other obligations over each land parcel to ensure compliance · ensure legal requirements regarding consultation processes are correctly followed.
The large number of submissions received through the ‘campaign’ website is evidence that many were unnecessarily concerned there was a plan to move the regional parks from council control.	The Our Auckland article titled ‘No plan to change ownership or management of Auckland’s regional parks’ released on 11 February 2022 provided reassurance that council was not planning to relinquish control of the regional parks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

62. The next steps will be:

· local board feedback provided through the minutes to this report will be sent to the hearings panel

· the hearings panel will hear from representatives of local boards on 9 May 2022

· hearings with submitters are booked for the week of 16 May 2022

· deliberations are booked for the week of 23 May 2022

· providing the hearings panel completes its report with recommendations for changes by 30 June 2022, the panel’s recommendations will be reported to the PACE committee on 11 August 2022.

63. The review’s target is to present to the PACE committee a final amended regional parks management plan for adoption at its meeting on 22 September 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of submissions to the draft plan (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Local board input to the preparation of the draft plan	93
c ⇩	Summary of response to local board input	107
d ⇩	Submitters identified by local board area	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jo Mackay - Project Manager

Authorisers

Justine Haves - General Manager, Regional Services Planning, Investment and Partnership

Claudia Wyss - Director Customer and Community Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Submission on central government’s proposals to transform recycling in Aotearoa

File No.: CP2022/04121

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To outline the opportunity and process for local board members to give feedback on the Ministry for the Environment’s consultation document: Te kapanoni i te hangarua: Transforming recycling.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 13 March 2022, the Ministry for the Environment released its consultation document on proposals to transform recycling in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

3. The consultation document seeks feedback on the following three proposals:

i) a container return scheme that encourages people to return their empty beverage containers for recycling

ii) improvements to household kerbside recycling, including nationwide standardised material collections and urban food scraps collection

iii) separation of food scraps from general waste for all businesses.

4. Approval of the submission is proposed to be delegated by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee at its 7 April 2022 meeting to two councillors and an Independent Māori Statutory Board representative.

5. Waste Solutions staff will lead the development of Auckland Council’s submission which is due to the Ministry for the Environment by 8 May 2022.

6. Auckland Council’s submission will be developed based on policy positions articulated in relevant council strategy, such as Te Mahere Whakahaere me te Whakaiti Tukunga Para i Tāmaki Makaurau 2018 – Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 and other recent council submissions on government policy relating to waste management and minimisation.

7. Feedback provided by local boards through the development of the Waste Plan 2018 and other related recent submissions on government policy will inform the overall direction of the submission.

8. Local boards can provide formal feedback by 5.00pm on 21 April 2022 to inform the council’s submission or by 5.00pm on 4 May 2022 to be appended to the council’s submission.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the Ministry for the Environment’s consultation document: Te kapanoni i te hangarua: Transforming recycling discussion document to inform the council’s draft submission.

Horopaki

Context

9. On 13 March 2022, the Ministry for the Environment released its consultation document, Te kawe i te haepapa para: Te kapanoni i te hangarua: Transforming recycling.

10. The document covers three proposals:

i) a container return scheme that encourages people to return their empty beverage containers for recycling

ii) improvements to household kerbside recycling, including nationwide standardised material collections and urban food scraps collection

iii) separation of food scraps from general waste for all businesses.

11. These are part of the wider Ministry for the Environment work programme including:

· a new waste strategy and associated legislation

· implementation of the 2021 National Plastics Action Plan

· the increase and expansion of the waste levy

· reducing greenhouse gas emissions from organic wastes via a proposed Emissions Reduction Plan.

12. The reasons for the changes include the need to:

· substantially increase our recycling rates noting that Aotearoa/New Zealand only recycles and composts about one-third of materials we place on the kerbside, with the rest going to landfills (many countries recycle two-thirds)

· reduce carbon emissions noting that the waste sector contributed around four per cent of our total greenhouse gas emissions in 2019, and around nine per cent of biogenic methane emissions.

13. Recent Auckland Council submissions to the Ministry for the Environment on waste related topics have supported development of a new waste strategy and legislation, developed in partnership with Māori, to move to a circular economy.

14. The council has been a long-time advocate for a national container return scheme, and co-led work with Marlborough District Council in 2020 to co-design a scheme with a wide range of sector stakeholders. The council has also supported work to standardise kerbside collections and highlighted the importance of reducing carbon emissions from organic waste in our recent submissions.

Timeframe

15. Submissions close on 8 May 2022. A delegated authority to approve the council’s submission is being sought in advance because the submission will be due before the next the Environment and Climate Change Committee meeting.

16. The Ministry for the Environment has provided indicative timeframes for the proposals:

· 2025 for implementation of the Container Return Scheme

· 2024-2030 for various requirements related to kerbside collections

· 2025-2030 for businesses in metropolitan areas to separate their food waste depending on availability of processing facilities.

17. These timeframes are subject to decisions on each proposal, together with other decisions pending and initiatives already underway. For example, decisions on whether to enact regulation under current legislation or wait until new legislation is in force.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Proposal 1: a container return scheme

18. A container return scheme (CRS) is proposed to incentivise people to return their empty beverage containers for recycling and/or refilling in exchange for a 20 cent per container refundable deposit.

19. A CRS could increase beverage container recovery to 85 per cent or higher, increasing the number of containers recycled annually by over one billion.

20. The scheme should reduce the large amount of recyclable material lost to landfill, reduce litter and emissions, and support a circular economy in recycling and reuse options.

21. A snapshot of the proposal is included in Attachment A to the agenda report.

Proposal 2: improvements to household kerbside recycling

22. The proposal includes two core proposals to improve household kerbside recycling:

i) collecting a standard set of materials across the country to reduce confusion and improve the quality and quantity of collected recycling

ii) all urban populations to have a kerbside food scraps collection to reduce climate emissions and recycle nutrients back to the soil.

23. It also includes four supporting areas of improvement:

i) requirement for both council and private-sector reporting on household kerbside collections

ii) setting targets/performance standards for councils; being a minimum baseline performance and a high achieving target for kerbside diversion

iii) separate collection of glass and paper/cardboard; and

iv) require all councils to provide a kerbside recycling collection to urban households.

24. A snapshot of the proposal is included in Attachment B to the agenda report.

Proposal 3: separation of food scraps for all businesses

25. This proposal is to require all businesses to collect food waste separately from other waste materials in order to reduce climate emissions and recycle nutrients back into our soil. Food waste diverted from landfills can be used to feed animals, improve soil quality and generate energy.

26. Feedback is sought on the different ways a requirement to separate food waste could be introduced and how it would affect businesses. A snapshot of the proposal is included in Attachment C to the agenda report.

Auckland Council’s position on the proposal

27. The council’s submission will be developed based on policy positions articulated in related plans and strategies together with evidence and data from subject matter experts from across the council family, and input from previous mana whenua engagement and public submissions.

28. Auckland Council’s position on waste management is guided by Te Mahere Whakahaere me te Whakaiti Tukunga Para i Tāmaki Makaurau – Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018 (‘the Waste Plan 2018’), and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

29. The Waste Plan 2018 is guided by the vision ‘Auckland aspires to be Zero Waste by 2040, taking care of people and the environment and turning waste into resources’ and sets out over 100 actions to achieve this vision. It continues a zero-waste vision that was originally set out in Auckland Council’s first Waste Minimisation and Management Plan 2012.

30. Staff will also advise the Waste Advisory Political Advisory Group of the consultation and offer an opportunity to input. Input will also be sought from mana whenua through the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum.

31. Staff are also contacting the Independent Māori Statutory Board and Tāmaki Makaurau Kaitiaki Forum to alert them to this proposal and the opportunity to provide input.

Timeframe for consultation on Transforming Recycling

Milestone	Date
Discussion document released	14 March 2022
Deadline for incorporated feedback	21 April 2022
Deadline for appended feedback	4 May 2022
Consultation period closes	8 May 2022
Decision-making on proposals	Later this year

Further material

32. Relevant strategies and existing agreed positions in the council’s recent submissions are mainly from:

a) Te Mahere Whakahaere me te Whakaiti Tukunga Para i Tāmaki Makaurau – Auckland Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018

b) Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33. The disposal and treatment of waste comprises around four per cent of Aotearoa’s gross greenhouse gas emissions. The main sources include organic waste, wastewater treatment, incineration and open burning, and biological waste treatment (composting).

34. The Transforming Recycling proposal includes measures to divert organic waste going to landfill, in alignment with the proposed Emissions Reduction Plan. The outcomes from this consultation, including potential diversion of food scraps by businesses, will influence Auckland’s ability to achieve its regional emissions reduction targets of halving emissions by 2030 and reaching net zero emissions by 2050, as adopted by the council through Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

35. Feedback from relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations on the draft submission will be sought. The council-group was involved in establishing existing council positions.

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

Local impacts and local board views

36. The proposals would impact on a range of council services such as kerbside collections and litter services, our work in supporting community initiatives including the resource recovery network, and programmes to raise public awareness and education amongst others. The proposals would have wider impacts on environmental outcomes and economic costs and opportunities including local opportunities to support a circular economy.

37. Local board views will be sought on the draft submission and either incorporated within the report or appended to the submission, depending on when they are able to provide their views. Local boards provided strong direction through the development of the Waste Plan 2018 and other related recent submissions on government policy and these views will inform the overall direction of the submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. Staff have contacted the Independent Māori Statutory Board, Tāmaki Makaurau Kaitiaki Forum and the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to alert them to this proposal and the opportunity to input.

39. The consultation document outlines opportunities for iwi involvement in the management of recycling schemes as well as job or entrepreneurial opportunities in the provision of the container return scheme. We will work with iwi to advocate for these types of opportunities in our submission. This aligns with the IMSB’s 2021 Schedule of Issues of Significance for Māori for council to identify Māori social procurement opportunities including in recycling and waste management.

40. Feedback expressed on previous related discussions and submissions, including consultation undertaken in 2021 on the submission to the Ministry for the Environment on a new waste strategy and legislation, will be incorporated into the development of this submission.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

41. The submission can be developed as part of business-as-usual central government advocacy activity.

42. Potential financial implications of the proposals for the council will be considered as part of the council’s submission.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. There is minimal risk in making a submission on the Ministry’s consultation document.

44. Potential risks to the council arising from implementation of proposals will be considered as part of the council’s submission.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Local board resolutions on the Transforming Recycling submission/draft will be included in the Auckland Council submission on this matter.

46. Below are the key dates for input into the submission:

· 5.00pm on 21 April 2022: deadline for feedback to be considered in the council’s submission. Formal feedback to inform the council’s submission needs to be returned to Jacob van der Poel (Jacob.vanderpoel@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz)

· 5.00pm on 4 May 2022: final date for any formal local board feedback to be appended to the submission. Formal feedback to inform the council’s submission needs to be returned to Jacob van der Poel

· as there is no Environment and Climate Change Committee meeting scheduled before the due date for submissions a committee report is being prepared to seek approval from the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee meeting on 7 April 2022. This will seek delegated authority for two councillors and a member of the Independent Māori Statutory Board for the approval of the council’s submission

· the final submission is due to the Ministry for the Environment by 8 May 2022. A copy of the final submission will be provided to all elected members, local board members, and the Independent Māori Statutory Board once submitted.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Container Return Scheme: Snapshot of the consultation Wellington: Ministry for the Environment	129
b ⇩	Te whakapiki i te hangarua paeara ā-kāinga Improvements to household kerbside recycling: A Snapshot Wellington: Ministry for the Environment	137
c ⇩	Te whakawehe i ngā para kai ā-pakihi Separation of business food waste	143

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

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board

21 April 2022

Transport Emissions Reduction Plan

File No.: CP2022/04123

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide a progress update on the development of the Transport Emissions Reduction Plan and seek formal local board feedback.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are developing a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) to deliver a 64 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2030 and achieve wider wellbeing outcomes. Improving equitable access to sustainable transport modes is a key principle of the TERP.

3. The TERP gives effect to the commitments in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan to halve regional emissions by 2030 and transition to net zero emissions by 2050.

4. The TERP is being developed in the wider context of increasing government action on climate change. This includes the development of the government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP), which is expected to introduce policy changes and additional funding to better enable the delivery of sustainable transport modes.

5. A recommended TERP pathway will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval in July 2022. Implementation of the pathway will require significant additional funding, policy changes and the reshaping of the urban environment by the Auckland Council group and Government.

6. A bespoke TERP emissions model has been developed to identify the scale of the challenge. Preliminary modelling indicates that change is possible, but the level of transformation required is immense. Three key observations arise from the modelling work so far:

· although central government has outlined several actions in its ERP, these do not go far enough, nor do they act fast enough to achieve a 64 per cent reduction in emissions. TERP must fill a large gap between the baseline and the target

· all levers across transport and a range of other sectors will need to be pulled as hard as they can be within the timeframe available

· among the levers, mode shift is by far the most powerful to meet the 2030 target. However, significant mode shift to all sustainable modes is required, especially active modes. A compact urban form and accelerated decarbonisation of the public and private vehicle fleet are also crucial.

7. Achieving a low carbon transport system will bring many other benefits for all Aucklanders, including cleaner air, safer streets, reduced transport costs and easier ways of getting around the city. The TERP will set out a pathway to deliver this vision.

8. Previous local board feedback shows overwhelming support for more investment in sustainable transport. There is also broad support for policies that suppress private vehicle travel, such as congestion pricing, subject to the adequate provision of sustainable options.

9. Local boards have a critical role to play in advocating for specific improvements that support their communities transitioning to low carbon travel, e.g., addressing safety hotspots, accelerating the delivery of walking, cycling and micromobility networks, and improving the coverage, frequency, and hours of operation for public transport.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board:

a) receive the progress update provided on the Transport Emissions Reduction Plan

b) note the scale of the challenge to meet Auckland’s transport emissions reduction target and that mode shift is the most powerful lever for reducing transport emissions

c) provide feedback on:

· ways to dramatically reduce transport emissions in its local board area, or more broadly, while achieving broader wellbeing outcomes

· ways to increase uptake of walking, cycling and public transport for communities in its local board area

· barriers that might prevent the implementation of a sustainable, healthy, accessible, and equitable transport system for Auckland, and potential solutions

· ways to build public support for the initiatives that will be introduced as part of the Transport Emissions Reduction Plan.

Horopaki

Context

10. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are developing a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) to deliver a 64 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2030. As transport is Auckland’s largest source of emissions, modelling has shown that this steep reduction in transport emissions is necessary to fulfil Auckland’s commitment to halve emissions by 2030 and transition to net zero emissions by 2050.^{^[3]}

11. The TERP also seeks to achieve wider wellbeing outcomes for mana whenua, mataawaka and Auckland’s diverse communities.

Past decisions and information provided

12. The TERP’s approach and governance framework were endorsed by the Environment and Climate Change Committee in August 2021 (ECC/2021/32). In December 2021, the Committee noted the urgency of Auckland’s decarbonisation challenge and unanimously endorsed Auckland Council and Auckland Transport taking quick and decisive action to reduce the region’s transport emissions through several ‘early actions’ that can be advanced prior to the approval of the TERP (ECC/2021/45).

13. A memo on the TERP was provided to local board members in October 2021 (Attachment A), followed by two local board briefings which were held online in November and December 2021.

Broader policy context

14. The TERP is being developed in the wider context of increasing government action on climate change. Central government is due to finalise its Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) in May 2022. Its ERP discussion document in November 2021 set out targets in key areas, including a 20 per cent reduction in vehicle kilometres travelled.

15. Central government’s ERP discussion document also includes many highly ambitious policy interventions that will be required to achieve those targets, which are well-aligned with Auckland’s TERP.

16. In its present state, however, the ERP leaves too many of its actions until after 2030. Therefore, the TERP cannot rely on government’s ERP alone to meet Auckland’s targets. The TERP needs to pull hard on all the levers available and advocate for government to bring forward the actions and investment it outlines in its ERP.

17. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS – UD) is another key instrument due to take effect that, over time, has the potential to enable significant emissions reductions through more compact urban forms. Auckland Council’s response to the NPS will be crucial.

18. The systemic changes that will be delivered through the ERP, resource management reforms, and the NPS - UD will create an environment that is much more conducive to reducing transport emissions than is currently the case – the near future context will be very different from what it is today.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Understanding the scale of the challenge

19. As reported to the Environment and Climate Change Committee in December 2021, preliminary modelling shows that a large gap remains between the baseline and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri’s modelled 64 per cent pathway, even accounting for initiatives within the government’s ERP. Modelling shows that there is likely only one pathway available for the TERP: it needs every lever available, and it needs to pull each of them as hard as it can.

20. The figure below illustrates the gap between the projected baseline (shown in red) and the target (shown in green).

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

21. Modelling shows that significant reduction in vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT) is the only plausible strategy to achieve a 64 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2030. Reducing VKT will require rapid and transformational improvements to public transport, walking and cycling options for all Aucklanders. Land use changes that enhance accessibility by bringing destinations closer will also be required, to make walking, cycling and public transport systematically the most competitive modes for daily trips.

22. Staff are also engaging with the freight, rail, shipping, and aviation sectors to understand the opportunity for emissions reduction within these sectors, opportunities for cross-sector collaboration, and potential barriers that need to be resolved.

Taking a systems approach

23. Cities around the world are increasingly taking a systems approach to transforming energy-intensive transport systems into sustainable, healthy, and accessible ones. This approach recognises that “climate action could be more efficient and effective if focused on systems as a whole, so that – by design – systems require less energy and materials, and produce less emissions, while achieving wider wellbeing outcomes, such as improving our health and safety, and subsequently better lives” (OECD 2022^{^[4]}).

24. Taking a systems approach to tackling Auckland’s carbon-intensive transport system means firstly addressing its car-oriented status quo and the cycle of induced demand, urban sprawl, and the long-standing erosion of active and shared transport modes that further perpetuate car dependency.

25. Induced demand, urban sprawl and erosion of shared and active transport modes are the source of high emissions and a number of negative impacts on people’s wellbeing, such as air and noise pollution, congestion, road injuries and fatalities, reduced travel options and unequal access to opportunities.

26. Without addressing the challenges of the transport system as a whole, there is a tendency for incremental improvements to dominate, focusing on technological and pricing solutions without changing the underlying system.

Developing a package of interventions

27. The TERP takes a systems approach in developing a high-level programme of interventions, which work synergistically to create a transport system that is sustainable-by-design and achieves broader wellbeing goals.

28. These interventions draw from best practice around the globe and fall under broader themes, examples of which are likely to include:

· accessible neighbourhoods in an accessible region

· using online options where appropriate e.g., working from home

· replacing private vehicles trips with active, public, and shared modes

· transitioning to zero emissions vehicles

· better options for moving goods.

29. Auckland Transport’s increased emphasis on addressing climate change and road harm means that there is a range of programmes underway that can be scaled up and funded as part of the implementation of the TERP pathway.

30. The scale of transformation required to drastically cut transport emissions will not be possible without fixing the existing inequities of the transport system. Improving equitable access to sustainable transport modes is therefore a key principle of the TERP. In most instances the types of interventions needed to bring about significant emissions reductions will also help improve transport equity. However, a small number of specific interventions (road pricing, for example) have the potential to make the transport system more unaffordable for some communities and additional mitigations will be required as part of the TERP programme.

Assessing the broader impacts of TERP

31. An impact assessment will be undertaken to assess the social, environmental, financial, and cultural impacts of the TERP. This assessment could:

· help inform decision-makers of the impacts on society as a whole

· support future decision-making about intervention design (e.g., to mitigate inequitable impacts, where to concentrate certain efforts)

· provide a sense of the type and scale of co-benefits (in addition to emissions reduction) and costs

· show the changes to costs and benefits over time (i.e., 2030 and beyond).

Identifying barriers and potential solutions

32. Work is underway to identify the legislative, regulatory, financial, and cultural impediments to achieving emissions reductions of the scale required by the TERP. The purpose in identifying these systemic barriers is not to set a cap on the ambition of the TERP but rather to document the reforms required at both central and local government level as part of the implementation of the TERP. Some of these barriers are features of the way in which institutions or funding mechanisms have been designed, others are more cultural in nature.

33. Many of the impediments are already well known and in many cases work is underway outside of the TERP process to address them. The barriers workstream of the TERP will bring this together and point to areas where further work is required over and above what is already underway across different agencies.

34. The output from this workstream will include:

· an assessment of the criticality of resolving specific barriers for the ability to achieve rapid and significant emissions reductions

· an assessment of the relative ease of resolving each barrier

· the role of Auckland Council and Auckland Transport in resolving each barrier – resolution of many of the barriers will fall within the remit of central government and local government’s role may be one of advocacy

· a high-level forward work programme, based on the above, to address the identified barriers.

35. Continued collaboration between Auckland Council, Auckland Transport, Waka Kotahi, and the Ministry of Transport on many of these issues will be crucial to the resolution of many of the barriers identified by this workstream.

Engagement

36. Staff have engaged with mana whenua, local boards, and a range of stakeholder groups in the development of the TERP. These groups include:

· Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum and iwi chairs

· local boards

· Auckland Council’s demographic advisory panels

· transport advocates, ranging from Bike Auckland to the Automobile Association

· business interests such as the Sustainable Business Council and Employers Manufacturers Association

· academics and experts in public health, Māori health, community psychology, injury prevention, disability access, sustainability transitions, climate finance

· frontline community groups such as South Seas Healthcare.

37. Feedback has generally been positive. There is widespread recognition on the need for systems change to achieve Auckland’s climate goals and address the problems caused by decades of transport and land use policies that have prioritised private vehicle travel over other sustainable modes.

38. Deep and sustained engagement with iwi Māori and Auckland’s diverse communities is necessary to reimagine a low carbon transport future for Auckland. Staff are exploring how the implementation of the TERP could be supported over a longer period through the use of deliberative democracy, living labs and wānanga to better enable citizen participation and identify community aspirations as well as barriers in transitioning to a sustainable, healthy, and accessible transport system.

Supporting the implementation of the TERP

Building public support

39. The TERP requires a thoughtful public communications approach to proactively socialise the scale of change required to achieve the region’s climate goals.

40. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council communications staff, with guidance from the Transport Emissions Reference Group, are developing an agreed set of principles to guide on-going and future communication campaigns and behavioural change programmes, as well as assess funding requirements for any dedicated additional campaigns/programmes to support the TERP.

Applying behavioural science to transport emissions reduction

41. Achieving a two thirds reduction in transport emissions by 2030 requires a range of responses, including the purposeful application of behavioural science. Information sharing or communication campaigns alone will not be sufficient.

42. Rather than assuming people’s preferences are fixed, social scientists point to “malleable preferences” and the opportunity to redesign infrastructure and services to bring about significant behavioural change and improved wellbeing.^{^[5]} A memo by Dr Jesse Allpress from Auckland’s RIMU provides an overview of the behavioural science behind reducing transport emissions (Attachment B to the agenda report).

Measuring Aucklanders’ access to opportunities via sustainable modes

43. Reducing VKT without impacting negatively on people’s wellbeing requires a focus on accessibility (people’s ability to reach desired services and activities) instead of mobility (people’s ability to travel faster and further).

44. Staff are developing a regionwide assessment framework to measure access to social and economic opportunities via walking, cycling and public transport. This framework will:

· measure access across the urban area to destinations (‘opportunities’) that enable the people of Tāmaki Makaurau to fulfil their daily needs consistently and reliably

· identify current barriers to access to opportunities for the people of Tāmaki Makaurau

· assess distribution of access across Tāmaki Makaurau and across demographic groups and understand how different factors (e.g., age, level of ability) could limit a person’s potential use of the transport network

· inform investment and planning for transport infrastructure and services, land-use planning, and the location of new facilities. This will involve integrating the framework into policy and investment decision-making processes over time.

Assessing willingness and ability to change travel behaviour

45. An initial project will investigate Aucklanders’ most frequent car trips with a focus on the real and perceived viability of non-driving alternatives. The research will survey over 4000 car drivers in Auckland on their ability and willingness to travel in alternative ways. These perceptions will be compared to ‘objective’ travel data from Google Maps.

46. The research will identify:

· where negative perception matches actual experience (to target service improvement)

· where negative perception does not match actual experience (to target other behavioural interventions)

· the suburbs and population groups where access to alternative modes of travel is poorest, so these inequities can be addressed via the TERP.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

47. Auckland has less than 100 months to transform its current transport and land use system to meet its 2030 emissions reduction target. Meeting this target will require a fundamental shift from traditional transport planning and investment processes. Incremental change, reliance on existing practices and focusing on standalone policy instruments will simply not be enough.

48. A transport emissions reduction plan needs an integrated mix of policies. Supply-side interventions that make public transport, walking and cycling more attractive will only lead to emissions reduction if they replace trips that were previously made in private cars. A stronger focus on demand-side approaches is also required, e.g., congestion pricing and changes to the supply and cost of parking.

49. While technological innovation and fleet improvements will play an important role in the transition to low carbon transport, particularly beyond 2030, these policies need to be combined with interventions that reduce the demand for travel in private vehicles and increase the use of sustainable transport modes.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

50. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are jointly developing the TERP. This is reflected in the composition of the working groups and in all levels of the governance framework.

51. The Auckland Transport Board is represented in the Transport Emissions Reference Group, which provides staff with oversight and direction on the TERP.

52. The TERP’s recommended pathway will be recommended to both the Environment and Climate Change committee and the Auckland Transport Board for their endorsement in mid-2022.

53. Implementation of the TERP will require concerted action from multiple agencies. Auckland Transport will be particularly critical to the success of implementation given its key role in relation to many aspects of Auckland’s transport network.

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

Local impacts and local board views

54. The TERP is a strategic regional plan and will not include area-specific projects. However, implementation of a transport decarbonisation pathway will have significant impacts at the local level.

55. Local board feedback on the Climate Change Commission’s draft advice, the government’s Emissions Reduction Plan discussion document and Auckland Transport’s Regional Land Transport Plan shows overwhelming support for more investment in sustainable transport. There is also broad support for policies that suppress private vehicle travel, such as congestion pricing, subject to a range of caveats, such as the adequate provision of sustainable options.

56. Local boards have a critical role to play in advocating for specific improvements that support their communities to transition to low carbon travel, e.g., addressing safety hotspots, accelerating the delivery of walking, cycling and micromobility networks, and improving the coverage, frequency, and hours of operation for public transport.

57. Staff are seeking feedback from the local boards on the following topics:

· ways to dramatically reduce transport emissions in the local board area, or more broadly, while achieving broader wellbeing outcomes

· ways to increase uptake of walking, cycling and public transport for communities in the local board area

· barriers that might prevent the implementation of a sustainable, healthy, accessible, and equitable transport system for Auckland, and potential solutions

· ways to build public support for the initiatives that will be introduced as part of the Transport Emissions Reduction Plan.

58. Successful implementation of the TERP at a local level will require Council Controlled organisations (CCOs) to urgently review how they currently design, consult on, fund, and implement minor capital works, as recommended in the Independent Panel’s review of Auckland Council’s CCOs.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

59. Addressing climate change for the benefit of current and future generations aligns strongly with Māori values of environmental and inter-generational wellbeing.

60. Some of the low carbon transport interventions that Mana Whenua and Mataawaka have advocated for in previous submissions include more reliable and affordable public transport as well as safe walking and cycling facilities.

61. Partnership with iwi, hapū and Māori organisations in delivering climate action is a common theme in submissions received. Equity is also a strong focus for many submitters, highlighting the need for a transport system that increases access, choice, and affordability, particularly for lower income groups and those living outside of the urban core.

62. Reducing transport emissions to mitigate against the worst impacts of climate change has significant positive implications for Māori. These include cleaner air, fewer traffic-related deaths and serious injuries, lower transport costs, and more equitable access to opportunities for whānau. However, without additional support, some low carbon transport policies could adversely impact on disadvantaged communities.

63. The Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum and Independent Māori Statutory Board are represented on the Transport Emissions Reference Group, which provides staff with oversight and direction on the TERP.

64. Staff have presented to the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum twice on the TERP and have also written directly to iwi chairs to seek early feedback.

65. A series of hui will be held between March 2022 and April 2022 to seek input from Mana Whenua and Mataawaka on the TERP, including solutions that will support Māori communities in Tāmaki Makaurau to transition to low carbon travel. The council expects to continue working with Mana Whenua and Mataawaka to co-design solutions as part of the implementation of the TERP.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

66. Development of the TERP is being funded from within existing Auckland Council and Auckland Transport budgets.

67. Delivery of the recommended pathway will require significant investment from both Auckland Council and central government over a period of many years. As part of the assessment of the wider impacts of the TERP, high level costings of the recommended pathway will be worked up. Detailed costings of specific interventions are beyond the scope of this plan, but this work will be undertaken over time as specific projects move closer to implementation.

68. Some of the early interventions identified in this report may require additional funding to that which is signalled in the Long-term Plan (LTP) and Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP). Funding implications will be investigated and reported back to the committee as part of the pre-implementation decision making process.

69. In the ERP discussion document, the government indicated its intention to substantially increase funding for public transport and active modes. Auckland would expect to benefit from a good proportion of any additional government funding given its greater potential for mode shift than other parts of New Zealand. Any confirmation of additional government funding would likely come through the final ERP and the government’s budget, both due in May 2022.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

70. The table below provides the key risks associated with the TERP. The paper presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 2 December 2021 includes the full risk register.

Risks	Mitigation update
There may not be sufficient evidence to credibly support the assumptions that will go into the model, especially if there is a delay to the technical work required, and some interventions will be difficult to model.	A consultancy has been engaged to provide advice on international best practice in terms of assessing the likely emissions reduction potential of interventions. This is being augmented by work undertaken internally to document the experiences of many international and domestic cities that have implemented the types of interventions that will be included in the recommended pathway.
Current central and local government funding, planning and regulatory frameworks are not reformed quickly enough to enable the transformation required to meet the transport emissions reduction goals in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri.	Work on identifying barriers to implementation and potential ways of unlocking them is an important aspect of the TERP. Responsibility for addressing many of them lies with other agencies and continued collaboration will be essential as the work proceeds. Government’s ERP discussion document proposes solutions for several key regulatory, fiscal, and legislative barriers.
Disruption from the scale of change required could disproportionately impact disadvantaged communities.	Equity has been one key focus area for the work to date. Many of the interventions proposed will help address current transport inequities, e.g., vastly improved public and active transport will help address lower levels of access and travel choice for certain parts of Auckland. Other interventions such as road pricing will require specific mitigation measures. The equity impacts of the recommended pathway will be assessed and presented to the committee.
Strong support for climate action does not always translate into support for specific action at the local level.	A public communications campaign is needed to identify the wider benefits of decarbonisation, the risks of inaction and the ways to ensure a Just Transition. Early work on this has started with the Reference Group. The implementation of specific actions within the chosen pathway will be subject to public consultation processes.
Auckland Council is not seen to model good emissions reducing behaviours within its own corporate activities	Auckland Council will be asking Aucklanders to make considerable adjustments to the way they travel around the city. It is important for the perceived credibility of the plan that council’s own practices are seen to role model best practice in reducing transport emissions. While the transition to a lower emissions fleet is a start, work should be undertaken immediately to consider what else could be done, particularly around site specific travel plans, encouragement for staff to use public transport, parking privileges.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

71. A recommended pathway will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval in July 2022. Feedback from local boards will be summarised and included in the committee report.

72. Implementation of the TERP will follow the committee’s decision in 2022. Local boards will have an opportunity to provide input on the interventions in the endorsed pathway as they are planned and implemented in the future.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local board memo October 2021 - TERP	159
b ⇩	The behavioural science behind reducing Auckland’s transport emissions	163

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Szening Ooi - Principal Transport Advisor

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Louise Mason – General Manager Local Board Services

[2] Notes: Duplicate submissions from the same submitter were excluded. The first of the identical campaign submissions is counted in the ‘unique’ submissions column. The campaign submissions provided postal codes which have been mapped to local board areas. Postal code areas do not match local board areas. The local board area forming the largest portion of the postal code area was assigned to the postal code, however some of these submitters may be resident in a neighbouring area.

[4] OECD (2021). Transport strategies for net-zero systems by design. https://www.oecd.org/climate-change/well-being-lens/

[5] Creutzig, F., Niamir, L., Bai, X. et al. (2022). Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being. Nature Climate Change, 12, 36–46.

Chairperson	Gary Brown
Deputy Chairperson	Victoria Short
Members	Andy Dunn
	Janet Fitzgerald, JP
	Gary Holmes
	Julia Parfitt, JP
	Alexis Poppelbaum
	Leanne Willis

Author	Louise Healy – Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager