I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Howick Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Monday, 20 June 2022

6.00pm

Howick Local Board Meeting Room
Pakuranga Library Complex
7 Aylesbury Street
Pakuranga

 

Howick Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Adele White

 

Deputy Chairperson

John Spiller

 

Members

Katrina Bungard

 

 

Bo Burns

 

 

David Collings

 

 

Bruce Kendall

 

 

Mike Turinsky

 

 

Bob Wichman

 

 

Peter Young, JP

 

 

(Quorum 5 members)

 

 

 

Matt Fletcher

Democracy Advisor

 

15 June 2022

 

Contact Telephone: 027 226 0530

Email: matt.fletcher@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Welcome                                                                                                                         5

2          Apologies                                                                                                                        5

3          Declaration of Interest                                                                                                   5

4          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               5

5          Leave of Absence                                                                                                          5

6          Acknowledgements                                                                                                       5

7          Petitions                                                                                                                          5

8          Deputations                                                                                                                    5

8.1     Janet Dickson                                                                                                       5

9          Public Forum                                                                                                                  6

10        Extraordinary Business                                                                                                6

11        Notices of Motion                                                                                                           6

12        Governing Body Member update                                                                                 7

13        Chairperson's Report                                                                                                    9

14        Notice of Motion - Chairperson Adele White - Anzac Traffic Management Plans 13

15        Urgent Decision - National Adaptation Plan                                                             17

16        Local board feedback on the council’s preliminary response to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021                                    25

17        Local board feedback on proposed supporting plan changes to accompany the Medium Density Residential Standards and National Policy Statement on Urban Development plan change                                                                                          49

18        Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Draft Parking Strategy (2022)   73

19        June 2022 – Auckland Transport Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report for Howick Local Board                                                                                                  235

20        Draft Auckland golf investment plan                                                                       239

21        Approval for a new private road name at 29 & 31 Challinor Street, Pakuranga Auckland 2010                                                                                                            921

22        Lloyd Elsmore Park Playspace Service Assessment Findings                           927

23        Community Facilities Network Plan revised Action Plan (2022)                          933

24        Approval of the Howick Local Board External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme 2022/2023                                                                                     963

25        Howick Quick Response Round Two 2021/2022 grant allocations                     969

26        Howick Sport and Recreation Initiatives Fund 2021/2022                                  1089

27        Approval of the 2022/2023 Howick Local Board Infrastructure and Environmental Services Work programme                                                                                     1109

28        Approval of the Howick Local Board Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme 2022/2023                                                                                                                  1121

29        Approval of the 2022/2023 Howick Local Board Customer and Community Services work programme                                                                                                      1127

30        Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund 2022 - Local Board views   1195

31        2022-23 Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plans and 2021-22 Q3 Update  1203

32        Workshop records                                                                                                   1233

33        Governance forward work calendar                                                                      1245

34        Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Welcome

 

 

2          Apologies

 

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

 

3          Declaration of Interest

 

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

 

4          Confirmation of Minutes

 

That the Howick Local Board:

a)         confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Monday, 16 May 2022, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

 

 

5          Leave of Absence

 

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

 

6          Acknowledgements

 

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

 

7          Petitions

 

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

 

8          Deputations

 

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Howick Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

 

8.1       Janet Dickson

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.    Janet Dickson of Howick Resident and Ratepayers’ Association will present to the board a deputation regarding a number of the group’s concerns.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      thank Janet Dickson for her deputation and attendance.

 

 

 

9          Public Forum

 

A period of time (approximately 30 minutes) is set aside for members of the public to address the meeting on matters within its delegated authority. A maximum of 3 minutes per item is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

 

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

 

10        Extraordinary Business

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

11        Notices of Motion

 

Under Standing Order 2.5.1 (LBS 3.11.1) or Standing Order 1.9.1 (LBS 3.10.17) (revoke or alter a previous resolution) a Notice of Motion has been received from <Member Names>  for consideration under item 14.

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Governing Body Member update

File No.: CP2022/08157

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Howick Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the local board on regional matters.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing the Howick Ward Councillors with an opportunity to update the local board on regional matters they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      receive the verbal reports from Cr Paul Young and Cr Sharon Stewart QSM.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.      

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Matt Fletcher - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Chairperson's Report

File No.: CP2022/08158

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       This item gives the local board chairperson an opportunity to update the local board on any announcements and note the chairperson’s written report.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Providing the local board chairperson with an opportunity to update the local board on the projects and issues they have been involved with since the last meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the chairperson’s verbal update and written report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Chairperson's Report

11

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Matt Fletcher - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT June 2022

 

Kia ora

Whilst the Local Board continues to carry out business meetings and workshops online, it has been good to get out and about again to meet with local groups and attend their events.

 

BOARD BUSINESS

 

This month we are able to celebrate some successes for the board.

Scooters and skateboarders from far and wide came to try out the new half pipe at Lloyd Elsmore skate park, opened on Saturday 27 May. It was fantastic to see our young people enjoying this facility amid a happy atmosphere complete with live band and a sausage sizzle onsite to celebrate.

Weather permitting we will open two new play spaces – at Earnslaw Park and Cockle Bay Beach – just in time for the July school holidays.

In coming weeks we look forward to the completion of the Bramley Drive Seawall renewal, the construction of our long awaited second shelter at Barry Curtis Park, an improved event space also in BCP, and a dog park in Lloyd Elsmore Park. I acknowledge Community Facilities for making these things happen after a difficult time of lack of materials and resources due to COVID.

On Wednesday 25 May I presented the Howick Local Board’s feedback and advocacy to the Finance and Performance committee. Thank you member Kendall for your support.

We are still to conclude the EOI process for the Howick War Memorial Building. It is disappointing that this has taken so long. I look forward to its conclusion, and seeing the building alive and activated.

The board continues to respond to requests for feedback on a myriad of issues. Some of this is further to public consultation, and some requiring the thoughts of the board. Much work is put in to this, and we can only hope we are listened to.

ATTENDANCES

11/05/2022     I attended and spoke at the 10th Anniversary of the Ormiston Police Station

12/05/2022     I attended a morning tea at Te Whare Wananga o Wairoa with members Burns and Kendall.  This was to thank the board for their support in obtaining a covered outdoor teaching space.

20/05/2022     I attended a meeting with the Flat Bush Residents group, Crimewatch Patrol and Police to set up patrols in Flat Bush   

22/05/2022     I spoke at the Botany Flat Bush Ethnic Assn 175 Celebration Concert and celebrating May Music Month

26/05/2022     I attended a post budget breakfast hosted by Naisi Chen and Dr Anae Leavasa

27/05/2022     I spoke at the opening of the Youth Council Summit. Members Collings, Burns and Turinsky attended the closure.

28/05/2022     I attended the opening of the Half Pipe at Lloyd Elsmore skatepark along with Dep Chair Spiller, and members Kendall, Turinsky and Collings, and spoke on behalf of the board

30/05/2022     I spoke at the opening of the Howick Photographic Society’s Exhibition at Uxbridge

1/06/2022       I spoke at the Enviroschools Sustainability Awards and presentation of prizes for the annual Moth Plant competition. Members Burns and Kendall attended also

2/06/2022       I attended the Police quarterly meeting with Southern Local Board Chairs

7/06/2022       I participated in the 7th online Citizenship ceremony

Over the month there have been numerous tree plantings, and waterway and street cleanups. I acknowledge those members who have attended these.

EVENTS

I look forward to the play space openings and the Howick Sports Awards which are scheduled to occur in the next few weeks.

Nga mihi

Adele White

Chairperson

HOWICK LOCAL BOARD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Notice of Motion - Chairperson Adele White - Anzac Traffic Management Plans

File No.: CP2022/07398

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary https://aklcouncil.sharepoint.com/sites/how-we-work/SitePages/executive-summary-reports.aspx

1.       Chairperson Adele White has given notice of a motion that they wish to propose.

2.       The notice, signed by Chair Adele White and Deputy Chair John Spiller as seconder, is appended as Attachment A.

Motion

That the Howick Local Board:

a)        note the significant cost relative to the ANZAC Day and other community events required by the associated Traffic Management Plan (TMP)

b)        note that other potential community events do not proceed at times because of the financial demands of traffic management and Traffic Management Plans.

c)        note that the prohibitive cost relative to the ANZAC Day events required by a TMP may result in the inability to fund further ANZAC Day Parades in Howick

d)        note the ANZAC parade takes the same route requiring the same management year on year, merely requiring a change of date.

e)        note the significance of this important event to current and returned service people, and the wider community; and acknowledge with respect the contribution and suffering of all those from Australia and New Zealand, who have served and died in all wars, conflicts, and peacekeeping operations.

f)         request that Auckland Transport provide a detailed cost breakdown of what constitutes a TMP for the ANZAC Parades for Howick RSA

g)        request that Auckland Transport investigate where costs can be reduced in the development of TMPs for ANZAC Day Parades in Howick

h)        request that Auckland Transport investigate the overall cost of traffic management provided to Local Boards and whether Traffic Management Companies charge the Auckland Council group a higher rate than charged to private companies and organisations.

i)         recommend that Auckland Transport develop one standardised template for TMPs that may be replicated without additional cost year on year.

j)         thank Auckland Transport for their support for the ANZAC Day Parade in Howick

k)        request that this Notice of Motion be forwarded to all local boards, the Mayor, all Councillors and the Board of Auckland Transport for their information.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Notice of Motion

15

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Matt Fletcher - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Notice of Motion

Anzac Traffic Management Plans

Submitted on 31 May 2022

Attention: Victoria Villaraza, Local Area Manager, Local Board Services

In accordance with Standing Order 2.5, I hereby give notice that I wish to move the following motion at the 20 June 2022 meeting of the Howick Local Board:

Recommendations:

That the Howick Local Board:

 

a)         note the significant cost relative to the ANZAC Day and other community events required by the associated Traffic Management Plan (TMP)

 

b)        note that other potential community events do not proceed at times because of the financial demands of traffic management and Traffic Management Plans.

c)        note that the prohibitive cost relative to the ANZAC Day events required by a TMP may result in the inability to fund further ANZAC Day Parades in Howick

d)        note the ANZAC parade takes the same route requiring the same management year on year, merely requiring a change of date.

e)        note the significance of this important event to current and returned service people, and the wider community; and acknowledge with respect the contribution and suffering of all those from Australia and New Zealand, who have served and died in all wars, conflicts, and peacekeeping operations.

f)         request that Auckland Transport provide a detailed cost breakdown of what constitutes a TMP for the ANZAC Parades for Howick RSA

g)        request that Auckland Transport investigate where costs can be reduced in the development of TMPs for ANZAC Day Parades in Howick

h)        request that Auckland Transport investigate the overall cost of traffic management provided to Local Boards and whether Traffic Management Companies charge the Auckland Council group a higher rate than charged to private companies and organisations.

i)         recommend that Auckland Transport develop one standardised template for TMPs that may be replicated without additional cost year on year.

j)         thank Auckland Transport for their support for the ANZAC Day Parade in Howick

k)        request that this Notice of Motion be forwarded to all local boards, the Mayor, all Councillors and the Board of Auckland Transport for their information.

A picture containing shape

Description automatically generated

Mover:                                                                                    Seconder:

			                 
John Spiller
		
Deputy Chairperson, Howick Local Board 	
Text, letter

Description automatically generated
                                                                                                               

                                                                            

Adele White                                                                           

Chairperson, Howick Local Board                                                         


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Urgent Decision - National Adaptation Plan

File No.: CP2022/08652

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To note that an urgent decision was made to provide feedback on the Government’s draft National Adaptation Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.      At its meeting on 9 December 2019 the Howick Local Board resolved (HW/2019/159) the following in relation to urgent decision-making:

That the Howick Local Board:

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

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

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

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

3.      The Local Board was given the opportunity to provide feedback on the Government’s draft National Adaptation Plan. This feedback was due before the 27th May in order to be appended to the Auckland Council submission.

 

4.      The next Howick Local Board Business meeting is on the 20th June 2022. Therefore, it was necessary to seek an urgent decision to formalise the Local Board’s position.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      endorses the draft council submission on the draft National Adaptation Plan in principle.

 

b)      provides the following feedback to the Governing Body on the draft National Adaptation Plan as follows:

 

i)    Auckland has a massive coastline with large harbours, with estuaries and rivers and streams feeding into them. All of these coastlines are extremely vulnerable to erosion and council don’t have the financial resources to manage and mitigate the associated risk. It is absolutely essential that central government recognise this and provide significant additional funding to assist with erosion prevention and for response to damage caused by events.

 

ii)   central government is compelling Auckland Council to enable massive infill housing with changes to legislation, including changes to the RMA. This has meant a big loss of urban trees, large additional non-permeable surface areas (concrete and asphalt paving instead of grass and garden areas) and has put additional strain on other infrastructure, notable storm water and wastewater systems. Government needs to consider these impacts and provide subsidy funding to assist with remediation. It also needs to consider how the RMA could be changed to give better protection to urban trees on privately owned properties.

 

iii)   the control of organisations that are responsible for providing potable water to citizens should remain at a local level, central government could provide loans or subsidies for bringing water infrastructure up to scratch instead of assuming ownership of assets that are locally owned and managed.

 

iv)  consideration should be given to future coastal development proposals such as canal waterways where the adjoining land-based housing is at risk from sea level changed. Managed retreat is obviously being considered so is it wise to sanction additional coastal waterway developments when they will soon be at risk.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Urgent Decision - National Adaptation Plan

19

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Blair Morrow – Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

Text

Description automatically generated with medium confidence


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Local board feedback on the council’s preliminary response to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021

File No.: CP2022/07886

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of this report is to seek feedback from the local board on the council’s preliminary response to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD) and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021 (RMA amendments).

2.       This report includes an overview of the feedback on the council’s preliminary response received through the public consultation from 19 April to 9 May 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3.       The council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD and RMA amendments are set out in the NPS-UD and the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS).  Some of these are not optional. Council must change the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) to put these new rules in place.

4.       However, the NPS-UD allows us to make some limited decisions to help shape the future of our city.  Council can determine:

i)        the distances of walkable catchments, where buildings of six storeys or more are required. These are the areas around the city centre, rapid transit stops, and the ten metropolitan centres (Albany, Takapuna, Westgate, Henderson, New Lynn, Newmarket, Sylvia Park, Manukau, Botany and Papakura)

ii)       the building heights and density to enable residential development within and next to other suburban centres – neighbourhoods centres, local centres, and town centres

iii)      the “qualifying matters” that will apply in Auckland, or the characteristics within some areas that may allow the council to modify (or limit) the required building heights and density.

5.       Central government has already identified a number of qualifying matters. The council is also able to include other ‘qualifying matters’ that are important for Auckland.

6.       The elements of the preliminary response that the council is able to determine were open to feedback. A three-week public engagement on the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD and RMA amendments was completed on 9 May 2022. This included an independently run survey of 2000 Aucklanders. The feedback has been analysed, and the themes that have emerged from that analysis were presented to local board on Monday, 30 May 2022

7.       The feedback summary report is attached to this report and has been published on the AKHaveYourSay website. The feedback responses received have also been published on the website.

8.       Local boards are now invited to give feedback on the council’s preliminary response, with particular regard to the matters available to council to make decisions on. A template (Attachment C) has been provided to assist the preparation of that feedback.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the council’s preliminary response to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 and the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act 2021

b)      note the feedback received from Aucklanders on the council’s preliminary response during the three-week public consultation in April and May 2022

c)      endorse the following feedback as the local board’s response to the council’s preliminary response, to be considered by the Planning Committee in preparation of the proposed intensification plan change for notification in August 2022

i)

ii)

iii) etc

 

 

Horopaki

Context

9.       The NPS-UD and the RMA amendments require that a proposed intensification plan change (IPI) must be notified by 20 August 2022. The Planning Committee and local board chairs (or their delegates) have attended numerous workshops and made decisions in 2021 and 2022 on preliminary policy directions to guide how the council will implement the NPS-UD and RMA amendments.

10.     At it’s meeting on 31 March 2022 the Planning Committee approved a preliminary response to the NPS-UD (Attachment A), for the purpose of public engagement for three weeks in April and May 2022. The preliminary response was made available to the public on the Auckland “Have Your Say” website from 19 April to 9 May.

11.     The preliminary response contained an overall consultation document, more detailed information sheets, and access to the GIS map viewer that illustrates zoning proposals that reflected the committee’s resolutions.  The maps also illustrated locations where various qualifying matters (mostly existing AUP overlays, endorsed by the committee) would limit the height and/or density that would otherwise be enabled.

12.     The GIS viewer was supported by information sheets that described the approach to intensification and the process that the council is following. The AUP text for the new zone provisions was not available for feedback, as this was (and is) still being prepared and tested.

13.     Since October 2021, local boards and mana whenua have been involved in helping the council develop its preliminary response. This report summarises the themes emerging from the public engagement.  Feedback received from the public, together with the ongoing involvement of local boards and mana whenua, will greatly assist the council in finalising the IPI for notification by 20 August 2022. 

14.     Feedback was specifically sought on the following matters:

i)        the extent of walkable catchments around the city centre, metropolitan centres and rapid transit network stops (as required under Policy 3(c))

ii)       the approach to, and extent of, intensification of areas adjacent to the city, metropolitan, town, local and neighbourhood centres (as required under Policy 3(d))

iii)      the selection of, and approach to, “any other qualifying matters” that limit the height and density that would otherwise be required as enabled under Policy 4. 

15.     Feedback was not sought on matters in the NPS-UD and RMA amendments that are mandatory.  Mandatory matters include the introduction of walkable catchments into the AUP, the enablement of six storey buildings in all zones in walkable catchments, and the application of medium density residential standards in all residential zones outside walkable catchments. 

16.     The public engagement (under the heading ‘Government’s new housing rules: what it means for Auckland’) comprised the following:

·        an overview of the response and how to give feedback

·        a main consultation document (also translated into numerous languages) with the full preliminary response overview

·        online feedback form with questions on consultation topics and an opportunity to provide reasons and further explanation

·        more detailed information sheets on a range of topics

·        frequently asked questions and an explanation video

·        special character area assessment survey reports

·        the GIS NPS-UD map viewer and user guide

·        information and booking links for webinars and events

·        access to a planning enquiry service for questions and further information.

17.     Hard copies of the main documents including the feedback form were placed in libraries and service centres.

18.     Online consultation activities and events were scheduled and undertaken through the engagement period, as follows:

·        four online webinars - two covering the whole preliminary response (with a focus on intensification), one on special character areas, and one on other council-identified qualifying matters

four ‘Have Your Say’ events – two for general opportunities for people or groups to present and discuss their feedback to members and staff, one for regional stakeholders, and one for residents’ groups and associations

·        two information meetings focussed on the special character areas qualifying matter – one on the North Shore and one in the city centre.

19.     In addition to the online and hard-copy feedback opportunity, an independently run sample survey of 2000 Aucklanders was procured from Kantar Public Limited. This was intended to enable a broader public perspective of the aspects of preliminary response, to complement the feedback offered and received from individuals, groups and organisations.

20.     All feedback received has been recorded, reviewed and allocated to themes to enable evaluation and assessment by staff and local board members. Summary reports have been prepared for the feedback received via the AKHaveYourSay website and also via the sample survey. All feedback has been published at AKHaveYourSay.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21.     Most feedback (6,094 items) was provided via our online feedback form, provided in eight languages (English, Te Reo Māori, Samoan, Tongan, Simplified and Traditional Chinese, Korean and Hindi). There were also 1,766 ‘non-feedback form’ items of feedback received via email or through the post. Feedback received after the consultation closing date has not been included in the analysis within the “Summary of Feedback” report (Attachment B). However, feedback received later than the closing date is being considered and will be made available for viewing along with the rest of the feedback received.

22.     Local board feedback on the preliminary response is now sought through resolutions at this meeting. This feedback will be considered in (and attached to) a report for the 30 June Planning Committee meeting where further policy directions will be determined towards the preparation of a proposed plan change for reporting to committee on 4 August 2022 for a decision on notification.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23.     Objective 8 and policy 1 of the NPS-UD set out a policy framework that signals the need for decisions under the RMA to reduce emissions and improve climate resilience.

24.     This framework is in line with the ‘built environment’ priority of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, which has a goal of achieving “A low carbon, resilient built environment that promotes healthy, low impact lifestyles”. The plan states that:

“To move to a low carbon and resilient region, climate change and hazard risks need to be integral to the planning system that shapes Auckland. Integrating land-use and transport planning is vital to reduce the need for private vehicle travel and to ensure housing and employment growth areas are connected to efficient, low carbon transport systems.”

25.     Applying the NPS-UD will enable additional residential intensification to occur in areas where jobs, services and amenities can be easily accessed by active modes and public transport. This will contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the more efficient use of land will reduce growth pressures in areas more susceptible to the effects of climate change. In some places, applying the MDRS required under the RMA amendments will also achieve this outcome. However, a key aspect of the council’s submission on the RMA amendments was that enabling three-storey medium density housing across Auckland’s urban environment, is likely to result in a greater number of people living in areas where it is extremely difficult to provide a high level of public transport service. A more detailed analysis of climate impacts will be possible once the mapping work required to implement the NPS-UD and the RMA amendments is more advanced.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     All relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations have been involved in preparing the council’s preliminary response to the NPS-UD and the RMA amendments. They will have an ongoing role during the feedback period through to and beyond 20 August 2022. Feedback received on the council’s preliminary response will be reviewed by the relevant departments and CCOs to assist the council in finalising the IPI for public notification.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27.     Local boards were briefed in October and November 2021 on the implications of the NPS-UD and local board chairs were invited to the series of Planning Committee workshops run in 2021 on the NPS-UD.  Local boards also received a detailed briefing on the council’s preliminary response in March and May 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28.     Auckland Council has obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its Significance and Engagement Policy to take special consideration when engaging with Māori and to enable Māori participation in council decision-making to promote Māori well-being.

29.     The NPS-UD provides for the interests of Māori through intensification to increase housing supply, alongside its identification of qualifying matters. The widespread intensification sought by the NPS-UD has the potential to affect Māori both negatively and positively. This includes with respect to culturally significant sites and landscapes, Treaty Settlement redress land, the urban form as it reflects mātauranga Māori and accessibility, and Māori facilities where customs and traditions are observed (such as marae).

30.     The relevant qualifying matters set out in the NPS-UD and RMA amendments include matters of national importance that decision-makers are required to recognise and provide for under section 6 of the RMA 1991, and matters necessary to implement, or to ensure consistency with, iwi participation legislation.

31.     Policy 9 of the NPS-UD sets out requirements for local authorities as follows:

“Local authorities, in taking account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) in relation to urban environments, must:

a)      involve hapū and iwi in the preparation of RMA planning documents and any FDSs by undertaking effective consultation that is early, meaningful and, as far as practicable, in accordance with tikanga Māori; and

b)      when preparing RMA planning documents and FDSs, take into account the values and aspirations of hapū and iwi for urban development; and

c)      provide opportunities in appropriate circumstances for Māori involvement in decision-making on resource consents, designations, heritage orders, and water conservation orders, including in relation to sites of significance to Māori and issues of cultural significance; and

d)      operate in a way that is consistent with iwi participation legislation.”

32.     Policy 9 directs the council to involve iwi and hapū in the NPS-UD, during the preparation of planning documents, and to take into account the values and aspirations of hapū and iwi for urban development in the region. In the context of the NPS-UD, the council must involve mana whenua and mataawaka within the region.

33.     Individual and collective engagement has raised several key themes relating  matters like the protection of scheduled and known cultural heritage and managing potential interface effects from new development with existing marae. This is supported by research undertaken by the council team in advance of these discussions with mana whenua. This has drawn on a wide range of council documents and publicly available information.

34.     Common themes that have been identified include:

a)      universal access to be provided in residential design for less able whānau members

b)      access to open space for health and wellbeing

c)      safe and connected whānau and communities

d)      avoiding development in areas poorly served by infrastructure

e)      access to affordable housing options

f)       maintaining access to customary activities e.g. waka launching, kaimoana gathering

g)      protection of Māori sites and places of cultural significance. Maintaining precincts that protect cultural values or are otherwise culturally sensitive (such as Ihumātao)

h)      avoiding negative effects of intensive residential development on established cultural activities/facilities (such as marae)

i)        provisions for Kohanga reo and Kura Kaupapa Māori in urban areas

j)        use of Māori design concepts in the development of commercial centres and in large residential developments

k)      use of mātauranga and tikanga Māori in the management of resources

l)        the support of measures to maintain and improve water quality, ecological areas, volcanic viewshafts, and the coastline

m)     avoiding exacerbating natural hazard risks

n)      maintaining the cultural significance of the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area

o)      concern that Future Urban Zone land will be prematurely rezoned.

35.     The council’s engagement team continues to actively work with mana whenua representatives on these matters. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36.       NPS-UD implementation has been progressing within existing budgets. However, the RMA amendments has resulted in a significant increase in the scale and complexity of the project, without any changes to the NPS-UD implementation timeframes. This will require a greater than anticipated level of change to the AUP.

37.     The financial impact of these changes will affect the current 2021-2022 and the 2022-2023 financial years, and potentially the following year. While it is expected that additional costs in the current financial year can be met through a re-prioritisation of work programmes within the Chief Planning Office, further costs (primarily relating to operation of an independent hearings panel and engagement of specialists) may require re-prioritisation of other work programmes from across the organisation.  Planning for the 2022-2023 financial year is currently underway, however any impacts will be of a scale that will not affect the council’s overall financial position.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38.     The government has set a deadline of 20 August 2022 for the council to publicly notify the IPI. Given the scale and complexity of the work required to meet this deadline, there is a risk that the quality of engagement on the council’s preliminary response will not meet the expectation of Aucklanders and key stakeholders, and that the council may not receive quality feedback from a wide range of interests.  There is also a risk that Aucklanders and key stakeholders are unclear about the mandatory requirements of the NPS-UD and the RMA amendments, and where the council has some discretion. 

39.     These risks have been mitigated to date by strong, clear communications in the lead-up to and during the engagement period.  The responses during the consultation period show a good response from Pasifika, and the general 25-44 age group.  The responses were underrepresented in Māori, Asian and the general 15-24 age group. There was over-representation in the responses by New Zealand European / European and those over 45 years old. 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40.     Staff continue to analyse feedback received, and this analysis will be presented to the committee, mana whenua and local boards to inform the completion of the IPI that must be publicly notified by 20 August 2022.  Public notification is the beginning of formal submissions and hearings of those submissions.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Consultation document

33

b

NPS-UD Summary of the consultation feedback (Under Separate Cover)

 

c

Local board feedback template

39

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Eryn Shields - Team Leader  Regional, North West and Islands

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

Table

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Local board feedback on proposed supporting plan changes to accompany the Medium Density Residential Standards and National Policy Statement on Urban Development plan change

File No.: CP2022/07980

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       The purpose of the report is to seek feedback from local boards on the development of draft plan changes and variations to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) that are to be considered for notification at the August 2022 Planning Committee meeting together with the Intensification Planning Instrument (IPI) on medium density residential standards (MDRS) and implementing Policies 3 and 4 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD). These are:

·        Transport-related changes to promote safe and efficient access to residentially zoned parking spaces and rear sites, and to address additional parking issues that were identified following the mandatory removal of car parking minimums from the AUP (Auckland-wide chapters E24 Lighting, E27 Transport, and E38 Subdivision – Urban   access and parking provisions).

·        Additions to scheduled items to enable their protection when the IPI is notified (Schedule 10 Notable Tree Schedule and Maps, and Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule, Statements and Maps).

·        Mandatory variations to incomplete plan changes (council-initiated and private) required by the government to ensure MDRS are applied in all relevant residential zones.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of the council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents.

3.       Auckland Council is required to publicly notify its IPI in August 2022 to implement the NPS- UD and MDRS in relevant residential zones.  The council’s IPI must now re-write residential objectives, policies and rules to include MDRS, as well as making other changes to implement NPS-UD intensification directives, like increasing height to at least six stories within walkable catchments of certain zones and the rapid transit network stations.

4.       Additional plan changes and variations are necessary to address related matters and are proposed to be notified alongside the IPI.

5.       Feedback is sought from local boards on the policy approach and content of these draft plan changes and variations prior to the Planning Committee’s August 2021 meeting where notification will be considered.

6.       The specific text of each plan change and variation is likely to be amended as these changes progress towards notification as a result of feedback received from local boards, iwi authorities, key stakeholders, internal specialists and legal review.

1.          

2.          

Transport

7.       Auckland Council has already removed minimum car parking requirements from the AUP as required by NPS-UD and is completing a technical plan change to address gaps created by those removals.  In doing so, other more complex additional parking matters need to be addressed in the AUP.

8.       Greater intensification across Auckland brings forward the need to address gaps and inconsistencies in the residential access provisions in chapters E27 Transport and E38 Subdivision - Urban.

Notable trees and Historic Heritage Places

9.       Additional notable trees and historic heritage places are proposed to be added to the AUP schedules 10 and 14 following staff-evaluation and these will be qualifying matters in the IPI. Historic heritage places and notable trees are qualifying matters that will be set out in the IPI to limit intensification so those values can be accommodated.  Amendments to the notable tree and historic heritage places schedules are required to both update and add in newly assessed items for protection. It is important to protect qualifying matters by including items that are not presently scheduled to avoid the loss of those items through intensification.

Variations to incomplete plan changes

10.     The government requires that the council prepare a variation for each plan change commenced, but not completed, at the time the December 2021 amendments to the Resource Management Act (RMA) came into force, where a change relates to a relevant residential zone.  The governments’ MDRS will apply for up to six private plan change requests, and one council-initiated change. 

3.          

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      note the content outlined in the agenda report relating to the development of draft plan changes and variations to the Auckland Unitary Plan to be considered for notification at the August 2022 Planning Committee meeting together with the Intensification Planning Instrument on medium density residential standards and implementing Policies 3 and 4 of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020

b)      provide feedback as the local board’s response to the matters discussed in this report:

i)       Transport

ii)       Notable trees - Schedule 10

iii)      Historic heritage - Schedule 14

iv)     Variations to incomplete plan changes.

 

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

11.     Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of the council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents.

12.     Local boards have a critical role in helping shape the council’s policy response to the NPS-UD. Plan changes and variations are required to address issues arising from implementing government policy and in terms of access matters in the Transport plan change, to address gaps and inconsistencies in the AUP provisions.  

13.     The plan changes and variations relate to:

Transport

·    Addressing access to residentially zoned parking spaces and rear sites to prioritise pedestrian access and safety and to improve access efficiency and convenience for all user groups.

·    Developing parking provisions to:

provide safe and convenient pedestrian access to dwellings that have no vehicle access 

require accessible parking so that people with disabilities can participate in everyday life 

ensure the loading/unloading of goods can occur in a manner that does not compromise the safe and efficient functioning of the road network (including accessways)

cater for emerging changes in transport, including greater use of e-bikes, micro-mobility devices and electric vehicles.   

Notable Trees and Historic Heritage Places

·    Updating the Auckland Unitary Plan notable tree schedule 10 and adding new notable trees

·    Adding new historic heritage places to the AUP historic heritage schedule 14, and removing one place from schedule 14.

Variations to incomplete plan changes

14.     The government requires variations so that all relevant residential zones include MDRS.  Variations will be complementary to the approach taken in the IPI. These mandatory variations must be processed alongside council’s IPI and will use the same fast-track process.  Council staff will prepare variations for:

 

Incomplete private plan changes relating to relevant residential zones:

Local board area in which land is located

PC 49 Drury East

Franklin

PC 50 Waihoehoe

Franklin

PC 51 Drury 2

Franklin

PC 59 Albany 10 precinct

Upper Harbour

PC 66 Schnapper Rock Road

Upper Harbour

PC 67 Hingaia precinct 1

Papakura

Incomplete council-initiated plan changes relating to relevant residential zones

Suburbs in which land is located

 

PC 60 Open space

Less than 20 sites across:

Forrest Hill

Ellerslie

Freemans Bay

Grey Lynn

Pukekohe

Beachlands

Waiuku

Howick

Birkenhead

Mangere East

 

15.     Addressing access and parking matters must be addressed alongside the IPI so that the development community responds to growth opportunities appropriately. The rule changes are required to implement standards for assessing resource consent applications.

16.     Protecting historic heritage places and notable trees is important to comprehensively address qualifying matters in the AUP and protect these for future generations. The IPI will acknowledge historic heritage places (and other values) and notable trees as qualifying matters, but a separate change is necessary for those historic heritage places and trees that are not already scheduled but whose known values are significant, and eligible for scheduling.

17.     Local board feedback is an important input to help develop the plan changes and variations that are proposed to be notified alongside the IPI in August 2022.

18.     Local boards will have a second opportunity to express views after submissions close on the changes.  Views expressed after submissions close in a resolution will be included in the analysis of the plan changes and submissions received.  If a local board chooses to provide its views, a local board member will be invited to present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who make the decision on the plan changes.

19.     This report provides an overview of the IPI-supporting plan changes related to transport matters, and additional and corrected historic heritage places and notable trees and mandatory variations to incorporate MDRS. This report does not include a recommendation. Planning staff cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views as part of reporting to the Planning Committee.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Transport

20.     The Plans and Places department maintains a ‘Residential Issues Register’ and is currently finalising the draft 2021 ‘Section 35 Monitoring: B2.3 Quality Built Environment’ report. The register and the draft section 35 report identify the need for changes to the AUP to achieve better-quality access outcomes. As noted above, the identified parking issues are a consequence of the mandatory removal of car parking minimums.

21.     Attachment A outlines a summary of the potential changes at this stage in the process and the principal reasons for the changes.

Notable Trees

22.     The AUP protects and retains notable trees with significant historical, botanical or amenity values. Trees or groups of trees in Schedule 10 were evaluated using a set of criteria based on historical association, scientific importance or rarity, contribution to ecosystem services, cultural association or accessibility and intrinsic value. These factors are considered in the context of human health, public safety, property, amenity values and biosecurity.

23.     Tree schedules are highly dynamic and are not as easily maintained as other AUP schedules which are static (e.g. Outstanding Natural Landscapes Overlay Schedule, Outstanding Natural Features Overlay Schedule) meaning that they fall out of date over time. This is because subdivision, development and consents for removal/alteration as well as emergency works affect the description of listings on the Schedule. The health of trees can also naturally deteriorate. Given the number of listings contained in the Schedule, errors will continue to be identified and further updates will therefore be required. To update Schedule 10 requires a plan change. These changes cannot be addressed through any other process.

24.     There is a database of nearly 600 nominations received as submissions through the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan process and further unsolicited nominations received through the current nomination process. These nominations have been received for trees right across the region and are not limited to any specific geographical area. There is an expectation from the community that the council will evaluate and progress a plan change to add trees to the Schedule. There is a large volume of nominations and due to resourcing constraints, it has not been possible to evaluate them all at once. There will however be a portion of these nominations which have been evaluated and some of these trees may be found to meet the criteria for scheduling.

25.     Notable tree nominations are being investigated in the Albert-Eden, Franklin, Howick, Ōrākei, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Rodney, Waitematā and Whau Local Boards. There are also more general amendments required to ensure the Schedule is accurate and operating as originally intended (for example, removals of listings where the tree has been physically removed, updating legal descriptions as a result of subdivision).

26.     Options relating to notable trees were presented to the Planning Committee on 5 November 2020 which resolved to review or make changes to the notable tree schedule as resources permit (PLA/2020/96). This included addressing existing nominations. It is important to note the scope of this work would not include calling for additional nominations.

27.     In accordance with the resolution discussed in paragraph 22, the Notable Trees Plan Change will amend Schedule 10 Notable Trees Schedule of the AUP as follows:

·        Add those nominated trees which merit inclusion to the schedule

·        Amend the schedule to address known inaccuracies/inconsistencies.

28.     The IPI will recognise notable trees as qualifying matters, including the newly proposed notable trees. A separate change is needed to schedule these additional trees as that is not the purpose of the IPI.

Historic Heritage

29.     Historic heritage is a matter of national importance that decision makers must consider under section 6 of the RMA. Significant historic heritage places are identified in Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule, Statements and Maps of the Unitary Plan. Places identified in the schedule are subject to the provisions of the Unitary Plan Historic Heritage Overlay, which seeks to protect scheduled historic heritage places from inappropriate subdivision, use and development and enable the appropriate use of scheduled historic heritage places.

30.     For a place to qualify to be included in the AUP historic heritage schedule, each place must meet the criteria and thresholds for scheduling that are outlined in the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) section of the AUP. Historic heritage places must be at least of considerable significance to their locality or beyond.

31.     Historic heritage places have been identified in the Albert-Eden, Henderson-Massey, Howick, Ōrakei, Rodney, Waitematā and Whau Local Boards. A list of these places is included in Attachment B.

32.     Most of these places were identified as a result of the survey of the special character values that was part of the council’s response to the NPS-UD. Other places were identified via public nominations.  This work is supported by a Planning Committee resolution:

where significant historic heritage values are identified within the Special Character Areas Overlay, develop a plan change for places or areas to be added to the Auckland Unitary Plan historic heritage schedule.[1]

33.     Each identified historic heritage place’s evaluation demonstrates the criteria and thresholds for scheduling set out in the RPS are satisfied. It is important that places with significant historic heritage values are included in the AUP historic heritage schedule, so that these values can be appropriately managed. The historic heritage places listed in Attachment B are proposed to be included in Schedule 14 via a plan change. 

34.     Two historic heritage places are proposed to be deleted.  The former St Andrews Sunday School Hall at 40 Rankin Avenue, New Lynn (Schedule 14.1 ID 189) was demolished in 2019.  The Residence at 147 Sturges Road, Henderson (ID 75). This historic heritage place has been identified as not meeting the RPS thresholds for scheduling. It is not appropriate for a historic heritage place without sufficient value to remain in the AUP historic heritage Schedule 14.

35.     The IPI will recognise scheduled historic heritage places as qualifying matters, by limiting intensification to the extent necessary to continue to provide for the scheduled values. A separate change is needed to schedule the newly identified historic heritage places and to remove the place at 147 Sturges Road, as that is not the purpose of the IPI.

Variations

36.     Amendments made to the RMA in December 2021 came into force immediately and require tier 1 local authorities (including Auckland) to incorporate the government’s MDRS into all relevant residential zones.

37.     The government’s intention is that all plan changes relating to relevant residential zones also incorporate MDRS.  Transitional provisions inserted into the RMA require the council to prepare variations where changes commenced, but were not completed, when the RMA was amended.  Up to seven variations are required to be notified at the same time as the council’s IPI, and to be processed alongside it.  Work is commencing on variations to these changes:

Incomplete private plan changes relating to relevant residential zones:

Local board area in which land is located

PC 49 Drury East

Franklin

PC 50 Waihoehoe

Franklin

PC 51 Drury 2

Franklin

PC 59 Albany 10 precinct

Upper Harbour

PC 66 Schnapper Rock Road

Upper Harbour

PC 67 Hingaia precinct 1

Papakura

Incomplete council-initiated plan changes relating to relevant residential zones

 

Suburbs in which land is located

 

PC 60 Open space

 

Less than 20 sites across:

Forrest Hill

Ellerslie

Freemans Bay

Grey Lynn

Pukekohe

Beachlands

Waiuku

Howick

Birkenhead

Mangere East

 

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38.     Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan sets out Auckland’s climate goals:

a)      to adapt to the impacts of climate change by planning for the changes we will face (climate adaptation)

b)      to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050 (climate mitigation).

39.     The first of the council’s climate goals is relevant because it relates to climate adaptation. That goal aligns with the legal principle for RMA decision-makers to have regard to the effects of climate change (section 7(i) RMA).

40.     However, the RMA currently precludes the second goal: consideration of climate mitigation. The council may only consider climate adaptation and resilience.

41.     Several plan changes have some bearing on climate change. The transport plan change addresses the car parking design for new developments and access to residential car parking spaces and rear sites. How sites are designed and accessed provides for climate resilience, particularly by encouraging people to walk and cycle and facilitating sustainable modes of transport. Adding notable trees to the AUP schedule provides statutory protection for trees, adds to biodiversity and improves urban amenity for residents.

4.          

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

42.     The draft transport plan change has been consulted on with internal advice from Auckland Transport, Watercare and all relevant council departments including Auckland Plans Strategy and Research, Resource Consents, Regulatory Services, Infrastructure & Environmental Services, and the Tāmaki Makaurau Design Ope (formerly the Urban Design Unit).

43.     Key specialists are also involved in the review of the draft transport provisions and their feedback will be considered in the ongoing development of this plan change.

44.     In addition, the planning team is also working with the Infrastructure and Environmental Services technical standards team in their development of an Access Technical Guidance document for the construction and design of residential, business and rural accesses.  This is to ensure the plan change and the technical guidance document are consistent with each other.  It is anticipated the technical guidance will be completed later this year, after the notification of the transport plan change.

5.          

6.          

7.          

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

Local impacts and local board views

45.     The extent of intensification anticipated by NPS-UD and RMA amendments will affect all local boards, except Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke.  Hauraki Gulf Islands are excluded from the application of MDRS and lie outside Auckland’s urban environment (where intensification is directed).

46.     Workshops were held with local boards on the draft transport plan change in November 2021 and in February 2022. Local boards’ feedback sought to address the access and parking matters by changing the operative AUP standards and/or creating new standards.  The draft section 32 report (which is being developed) also concurs that the issues are best addressed through statutory methods (e.g. a plan change). However, some matters could be supported by a non-statutory design guidance (e.g., cycle parking).  Other matter such as the access requirements for fire and emergency services are best addressed by additional staff training and amendments to the access Practice and Guidance Note.   Attachment C provides a summary of what we heard from local boards during workshops earlier in the year.

47.     This report and related briefings provide an opportunity for local board views to inform policy development.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48.     Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau is Council’s framework for measuring our performance in delivering on the strategic priorities identified by Māori.

49.     Policy 9 of NPS-UD directs the council to particularly involve iwi and hapū in the NPS-UD during the preparation of planning documents. The proposed plan changes to implement the intensification provisions is one planning document.

50.     All mana whenua entities recognised by the council receive ongoing invitations to engage and provide feedback on the NPS-UD programme including the supporting draft transport plan change. All representatives (including those electing not to participate in collective meetings or workshops) receive information, updates and hui notes.

51.     Relevant common themes identified to date include:

a)      Universal access provided in residential design for less able whānau members

b)      Safe and connected whānau and communities.

52.     Staff provide regular updates on all plan changes to mana whenua and specific briefings are planned for late May and June on these changes and the IPI.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

53.     The local board is not exposed to any financial risk from providing its views on policy development.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

54.     The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a draft plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s). This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

55.     Any views provided by the local board will be included in the August 2022 report to the Planning Committee seeking decisions on the IPI plan changes and the IPI-supporting plan changes and variations.  Following the close of submissions, local boards will have the opportunity to express views on the notified changes.

56.     If resolutions are passed after submissions close, the relevant local boards will be informed of the hearing date and invited to speak at the hearing in support of their views. Planning staff will advise the local board of the decision on the plan change by memorandum.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A: Summary of key potential changes to the draft transport plan change

59

b

Attachment B: Histroic heritage places proposed to be added to Schedule 14

67

c

Attachment C: Summary of what we heard from local boards during workshops

69

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Michele Perwick - Senior Principal Planner

Tony Reidy - Team Leader Planning

Emma Rush - Senior Advisor Special Projects

Teuila Young - Policy Planner

Eryn Shields - Team Leader  Regional, North West and Islands

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Local board feedback on Auckland Transport's Draft Parking Strategy (2022)

File No.: CP2022/07870

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on Auckland Transport’s Draft Parking Strategy (2022).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Parking Strategy sets out the objectives, principles and policies relating to Auckland Transport’s management and supply of parking across Auckland and was last updated in 2015.

3.       Since 2015, numerous changes in both the central and local government context mean that a review of the Parking Strategy (2015) was required.

4.       The review has involved engagement with elected members, mana whenua, key stakeholders and the wider community.

5.       In late May, Auckland Transport (AT) provided summaries of public engagement to all local boards. This report is to seek feedback from local boards, having had the opportunity to review feedback from their community, on the Draft Auckland Parking Strategy (2022).

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      provide feedback, taking into consideration their community’s feedback, on the Draft Auckland Parking Strategy (2022).

 

Horopaki

Context

6.       The current Parking Strategy (2015) was progressive at the time it was introduced, bringing about many changes in Auckland including wider acceptance of priced parking; however, it is no longer fit for purpose. Since it was developed there have been numerous changes to the policy and planning context including:

·        adoption of the Auckland Unitary Plan. Development signalled in the Unitary Plan will enable growth that may be difficult to service with public transport, meaning that some new suburbs will rely on car use for access

·        changes to travel behaviour, such as the emergence of micromobility (i.e., electric scooters) and the growth of the delivery economy

·        Auckland’s public transport network has matured over time, providing opportunities for further passenger uptake and efficiency related to park and ride management

·        market demand is pushing for more housing provision and density. Development is already showing evidence of less carparking provision and more issues with carparking compliance

·        the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) which guides direction on urban development through the Unitary Plan. The NPS-UD requires Auckland Council to remove parking minimum requirements from the Unitary Plan, which means that developments will not be required to provide onsite parking. This will contribute to society and transport becoming less car-centric over time; however, it will lead to increasing pressure on public parking resources, particularly on-street parking

·        both central government and Auckland Council have declared ‘climate emergencies’, prioritising policy initiatives and investment that will reduce carbon emissions. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan and other plans and strategies proposed by central government will require changes to the land transport system, including parking.

7.       The Draft Auckland Parking Strategy (2022) is an important element of aligning and addressing Auckland’s response to these issues, particularly by managing parking in a way that:

·        supports public transport and alternative modes, which will make public transport and active modes such as walking and cycling safer and more convenient

·        responds to Auckland’s population growth and land-use intensification

·        acknowledges that space for carparking is a limited public resource.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8.       The Draft Parking Strategy (2022) (Attachment A) sets out the strategic context and the need to manage the transport system, as well as the strategic objectives and agreed principles for parking management.

9.       The proposed approach to planning parking management is set out on pages 26-36 of Attachment A. The key elements of this are:

·        proactively applying parking management in areas that have land use intensity and good public transport access

·        repurposing road space away from parking where this is required to enable delivery of the Strategic Transport Network.

10.     The accompanying parking policies (p38-63 of Attachment A) provide more technical detail on how parking is proposed to be managed in order to align to the principles set out in the strategic direction. The policies are grouped by:

·        provision and approach

·        on-street and off-street

·        specific vehicle classes

·        specific situations.

11.     The strategy also includes a section on advocacy to central government for legislative and/or regulatory reform as there are some areas of parking management that are outside local government control. Including these areas also provides context on the limitations of regulation in areas we would like to effect change and achieve better outcomes. These areas include:

·        parking infringement fines

·        banning berm parking

·        residential parking permit cost-setting

·        influencing private parking through parking levies.

12.     In December 2021, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council released a Parking Discussion Document to start the conversation with the public on future parking management in Auckland. AT received 32 pieces of written feedback. Following this feedback, several areas of the draft Parking Strategy and its accompanying policies were updated, including:

·        developing the narrative to better link it to the broader transport story, strategic objectives and policy rationale, as well as regulatory areas in need of reform

·        focussing on the benefits of parking management to enable and support access, resulting in a more equitable transport system

·        articulating the benefits and implications of parking to the community

·        acknowledging the costs of parking provision

·        emphasising parking diversity to enable mode shift

·        emphasising that the roll-out of further parking management will happen over time, starting where there is most readiness for change, and that this is a ten-year plan

·        outlining indicators of success

·        ensuring that consultation materials acknowledge the existing context and public fatigue.

13.     Strategic direction provided by the Planning Committee has also guided development of the draft strategy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14.     The National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD) requires planning decisions to contribute to the development of urban environments that support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and are resilient to the likely current and future effects of climate change.

15.     Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan outlines the need for Auckland to reduce its transport-related emissions significantly, to meet the target of 64% reduction by 2030. This means that business as usual for transport and land-use project planning and delivery, and management of the transport system, cannot continue.

16.     Parking management is a lever in managing the transport network, both in terms of the opportunities that repurposing of road space offers to enabling other modes, and in disincentivising car use.

17.     Implementing the Parking Strategy will include repurposing parking lanes on key roads in Auckland, increasing the diversity of transport options and improving safety and efficiency for people using sustainable modes and for goods and service delivery. This is a key change required to reduce transport-related emissions, meaning the Parking Strategy is of significant importance as an early step to transport-related climate action.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18.     Auckland Transport has engaged with key stakeholders across the council family, including raising awareness of the review with Auckland Council’s advisory panels.

19.     Eke Panuku and Auckland Unlimited provided feedback during engagement on the Parking Discussion Document. Their feedback was supportive of the proposed approach.

20.     Both the need for review and the Draft Auckland Parking Strategy (2022) prepared for public consultation have been endorsed by Auckland Council’s Planning Committee (Resolution number PLA/2022/24).

21.     Considerable liaison has taken place between Auckland Transport and Auckland Council departments ranging from Planning and Transport Strategy at a strategic level to Community Facilities about management of car parking in or near community parks.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22.     Since Auckland Council and the Auckland Transport Board approved the review of the Parking Strategy in 2021, Auckland Transport has engaged with elected members, mana whenua, key stakeholders and the wider community. The objective of the engagement process has been to ensure that Aucklanders are aware of the review, have had an opportunity to find out more about the proposed changes, and have had an opportunity to provide feedback.

23.     The engagement process included the following key activities:

a)      in 2021, information about the review was sent to all local boards and presented to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum

b)      all local boards were offered a workshop in August 2021, and in September 2021 all were invited to provide feedback that would contribute to the initial thinking around development of an updated draft document

c)      in December 2021, a Parking Discussion Document was published, targeted at key stakeholders and calling for initial feedback. 32 pieces of written feedback were received

d)      in March 2022, information about upcoming wider public consultation was provided to local boards along with a further workshop with Auckland Transport subject matter experts. The public consultation was again promoted through the Local Board Chairs’ Forum in April 2022

e)      public engagement and consultation on the Draft Auckland Parking Strategy has recently closed. Auckland Transport received 943 submissions. Responses from the community have been collated and provided to local boards as area specific reports (Attachment B). Public engagement included:

i)       media (OurAuckland, radio) and social media (videos) marketing to let the public know about the engagement

ii)       online information

iii)      webinars at which Auckland Transport staff were available to discuss the proposal with members of the public

iv)     nine open days held in libraries around the region for members of the public to discuss the proposal with Auckland Transport staff

v)      discussions with key stakeholders including business associations, industry groups, emergency services, utilities, and other government agencies

vi)     a public debate about parking issues.

24.     This report provides the opportunity for the local board to give their feedback, based on consideration of their community’s feedback, on the Draft Parking Strategy (2022).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

25.     Parking management is a kaitiakitanga issue, in that it is about managing a limited public resource. Auckland Transport has engaged with the Tāmaki Makaurau Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum to establish how best to incorporate views from mana whenua into the review.

26.     Feedback from a series of AT hui with mana whenua representatives reinforced that parking is a topic of considerable concern to Māori. Other points raised include:

·        acknowledgement that, as well as the strategic concerns around air quality and resource management, parking enables access

·        that parking infringements can contribute to creating a cycle of debt

·        that communities are facing compounding pressures - parking management shouldn’t adversely impact people and places even further

·        the potential for parking management to further reduce access - particularly for less able-bodied kaumatua and kuia - to the whenua, the moana and to wahi tapu.

27.     Other potential impacts of increased parking management for Māori are likely to be similar to those for the wider population. Some members of the community are more reliant on cars for access, particularly if they do not have good access to public transport. Barriers to public transport, such as cost and network coverage, influence access to necessities such as education, healthcare, employment, shopping, and social services.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28.     Parking management resourcing will be delivered through AT operational budgets. Initial work to understand the resourcing required to implement the strategy indicates that this will require significant resource increases for planning, design, compliance monitoring and enforcement. It is currently expected that the strategy would be at least revenue-neutral overall once compliance monitoring/enforcement revenue is considered.

29.     Revenue from parking management helps to offset AT operational costs and therefore reduce reliance on ratepayer funding.

30.     There are no financial implications for local boards associated with providing feedback on the Draft Parking Strategy (2022).

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31.     There are significant risks associated with adopting a new approach to parking management in Auckland – however these must be weighed against the opportunity costs of not having an appropriate framework in place to manage parking. These include:

a)      persistent and increasing issues with over-reliance on on-street parking, particularly since the removal of onsite parking requirements in the Unitary Plan

b)      reduced ability to support development of the public transport and cycling network (both of which reduce emissions) and less ability to enable place-based improvements within the road corridor

c)      not having the ability to take an integrated and strategic approach that supports business when managing parking in town centres using collaborative parking management plans

d)      less flexibility with managing the impacts of increased population growth and intensification.

32.     Strong, considered feedback from local boards will enable Auckland Transport to make good decisions about the Parking Strategy while they balance these risks against the opportunity costs described above.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33.     Feedback from local boards will be reviewed and taken into account as staff consider any amendments to the Draft Auckland Parking Strategy before recommendations to the Auckland Council Planning Committee are made in August 2022.

34.     Following endorsement of the Auckland Parking Strategy by the Auckland Council Planning Committee, approval will be sought from the Auckland Transport Board.

35.     Once approved by the Auckland Transport Board, the new Parking Strategy will be introduced.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A

79

b

Attachment B

159

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Claire Covacich, Principal Transport Planner, Auckland Transport

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Andrew McGill, Head of Integrated Network Planning, Auckland Transport

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

June 2022 – Auckland Transport Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report for Howick Local Board

File No.: CP2022/08633

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek a decision from the Howick Local Board to allocate their remaining Local Board Transport Capital Fund budget to their priority projects.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

 

2.      Local boards can use the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) to deliver transport infrastructure projects that are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme.

3.      There is currently $491,854.33 available for the local board to allocate.

4.      This report makes recommendations for the local board to allocate their remaining LBTCF budget to the following project:

·    Picton Street / Ridge Road intersection improvements outside Crawford Reserve

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      Receive the report titled June 2022 – Auckland Transport Local Board Transport Capital Fund Report for the Howick Local Board; and

b)      Allocate $491,854.33 from its Local Board Transport Capital Fund for the Picton Street/Ridge Road Intersection Improvements outside Crawford Reserve.

Horopaki

Context

 

5.      This report seeks to allocate the remaining LBTCF budget allocation for the Howick Local Board for the 2021-2023 electoral term.

6.      The LBTCF is a capital budget provided to all local boards by Auckland Council and delivered by Auckland Transport. Local boards can use this fund to deliver transport infrastructure projects that they believe are important but are not part of Auckland Transport’s work programme. Projects must also:

• be safe

• not impede network efficiency

• be in the road corridor (although projects running through parks can be considered if there is a transport outcome).

7.      The Regional Land Transport Plan has allocated $20m per annum to the 21 local boards.

8.      The Howick Local Board’s share of the 2021-2023 LBTCF fund for this electoral term is $3,354,354.

9.      Of this $3,354,354 budget the Local Board has $491,854.33 remaining budget to allocate to priority projects.

10.    Therefore, this report seeks a local board decision to allocate its remaining LBTCF budget by June 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Proposed Local Board Projects

11.    The proposal below was presented to the Howick Local Board at their 26 May 2022 workshop.

Table 1: Recommended proposals for funding via the Local Board Transport Capital Fund

 

Project

Cost

Picton Street/ Ridge Road intersection improvements outside Crawford Reserve

$491,854.33

Total

$491,854.33

 

12. A brief synopsis of this project is as follows:

 

Picton Street / Ridge Road intersection improvements outside Crawford Reserve

13.    Improvements to the Picton Street/Ridge Road intersection just outside Crawford Reserve were recommended as part of the larger Howick Village Upgrade Concept Design. The current layout provides a poor level of service for pedestrians and is near both a bus stop and public reserves.

14.    The proposed project will improve the intersection for pedestrians by reducing crossing distance and reducing vehicle speeds entering and exiting Picton Street.

15.    This report recommends that $491,854.33 be contributed towards the design and construction of this project.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

16.    Auckland Transport engages closely with Council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and Council’s priorities.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18.    The impact of information in this report is mainly confined to Auckland Transport. Where LBTCF projects are being progressed by Auckland Council’s Community Facilities group, engagement will take place. Any further engagement required with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19.    Auckland Transport has had multiple workshops with the Local Board to establish the local boards priority projects recommended for LBTCF budget allocation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21.    Allocating the Local Board Transport Capital Fund budget as recommended will expend all of the outstanding funds in this political term.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

22.    The proposed decision of receiving the report and directing Auckland Transport have no risks to the Board.

23.    There is a risk that budgets might be impacted by current budget reviews.

24.    After the last lockdown in 2020, projects that were already contracted out once the Emergency Budget was resolved continued to be delivered, therefore the local board is advised to allocate funding to its preferred projects as soon as possible.

 

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25.    Auckland Transport will progress the decisions made by the local board as a result of this report and provide updates via the regular formal reporting.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Jennifer Fraser – Elected Member Relationship Partner

Authorisers

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Matt Ah Mu – Program Support Manager – Local Boards

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Draft Auckland golf investment plan

File No.: CP2022/07938

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek tautoko / support for the draft Auckland golf investment plan titled Where all Aucklanders benefit from publicly owned golf land.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       To increase Aucklander’s access to, and the benefits from, publicly owned golf land, staff have developed a draft investment plan.

3.       Staff recommend that you support the draft Auckland golf investment plan titled Where all Aucklanders benefit from publicly owned golf land.  

4.       There will be increased accountability and transparency from an outcome-focused investment approach and a clear decision-making framework. Implementation of the plan is expected to achieve:

·     increased equity, sport and recreation by opening up publicly owned golf land to all Aucklanders

·     increased equity and participation by providing a broad range of golf experiences that attract and retain participants and services targeted at low participation groups

·     best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation of publicly owned golf land.

5.       If adopted, any future investment would need to align with the plan. The main trade-off is between taking a consistent regional approach to future decision-making and one-off decisions as current leases end.

6.       The next step is for the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee to consider adoption of the plan in August 2022. Local board feedback will help inform their decision-making.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a)      tautoko / support the draft Auckland golf investment plan titled Where all Aucklanders benefit from publicly owned golf land attached to this report (Attachment A)

b)      tautoko / support the three policy objectives set in the draft Auckland golf investment plan:

i)        increased equity, sport and recreation by opening up publicly owned golf land to all Aucklanders

ii)       increased equity and participation by providing a broad range of golf experiences that attract and retain participants and services targeted at low participation groups

iii)      best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation of publicly owned golf land.

c)      tautoko / support the decision-making framework set in the draft Auckland golf investment plan, in which future use of publicly owned golf land will be considered in the context of local needs, increased equity, participation and environmental outcomes.

 

 

Horopaki

Context

Exclusive use of publicly owned land for golf is not sustainable

Problem definition

7.       There are 13 golf courses operating on 535 hectares of council-owned or managed land. This publicly owned land has an estimated value of $2.9 billion in 2018.[2]

8.       Public access to this land, other than to play golf, is limited, which means that some Aucklanders are missing out.

9.       There are competing demands to provide open space and community facilities. Housing and business land is also in short supply in urban areas.

10.     This makes exclusive use of publicly owned land by a single sports code unsustainable.

 

The draft investment plan builds on community engagement, research and analysis

11.     Development of the draft plan involved community engagement, research and analysis.

12.     Work commenced in 2016 with the release of a discussion document for public engagement [PAR/2016/11 refers].

13.     The investment approach was supported by a majority of Aucklanders who responded to the consultation in 2016. There was strong feedback for council to maximise the benefits from its investment in golf. This is reflected in the draft plan.

14.     Following analysis of submissions on the discussion document, the Parks, Sport and Recreation Committee approved development of a draft plan with the following components [PAR/2016/52 refers]:

·     a policy statement setting out the vision, investment principles and the scope of council’s investment.

·     a decision-making framework that sets how the investment approach will be applied as well as ongoing reporting and monitoring.

15.     A range of research was undertaken to support the development of a draft plan, including an analysis of the value of golf to Auckland’s economy and benchmarking to assess the environmental performance of golf courses on publicly owned land.

16.     Cost-benefit analyses were undertaken of the 13 golf courses. A tool was developed to assess the costs and benefits of different forms of sport and recreation investment.

17.     An intervention logic and decision-making framework were developed and refined following workshops with the Environment and Community Committee and 10 local boards in September and November 2018.

18.     Key aspects of the draft plan were workshopped with the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in December 2021.

19.     The Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee considered the draft plan in February 2022 and invited staff to use this document to engage with the community.


 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Changes are proposed so that all Aucklanders benefit from publicly owned golf land

20.     Staff have developed a draft Auckland golf investment plan in order to make publicly owned golf land accessible to Aucklanders and to increase public benefits from this land.

21.     It proposes three policy objectives:

·     increase equity, sport and recreation by opening up publicly owned golf land to all Aucklanders

·     increase equity and participation by providing a broad range of golf experiences that attract and retain participants and services targeted at low participation groups

·     best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation of publicly owned golf land.

22.     The proposed outcome-focused investment approach, with a clear decision-making framework, would also increase accountability and transparency.

Increasing public value is an accepted public sector approach

23.     The draft plan takes a public value approach as it aims to deliver more public value to Aucklanders from council investment.

24.     Public value is an accepted approach. It has informed public policy in New Zealand and other countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom since the mid-1990s.[3]

25.     It focuses decision-making on how best to manage public assets to benefit all members of  society.

26.     Alternate approaches, where council does not consider the costs and benefits of allocating publicly owned land to golf or public versus private benefits, have been discounted.

27.     These factors cannot be overlooked when there are competing demands for open space or community facilities and land supply constraints.

The investment approach is consistent with council policy

28.     In 2019, the Environment and Community Committee adopted the Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 [ENV/2019/93 refers].

29.     The draft plan is consistent with council policy on sport investment.[4] It has the same investment objective of increasing equity and participation and the same investment principles as the overarching sport investment plan.

30.     A separate plan from Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 was needed because there is more complexity to golf both in terms of costs and benefits. For example, golf courses may operate on marginal land, and they can have other functions such as stormwater management.

31.     Increasing environmental benefits were an additional consideration given the large land areas currently allocated to golf.

The draft plan proposes four key shifts to benefit all Aucklanders

32.     Four key shifts to the status quo are proposed so that all Aucklanders benefit from increased equity, participation and environmental outcomes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: Four key shifts to deliver increased benefits to Aucklanders

1

 

FROM ad hoc historic decisions of legacy councils

Now there is intensive demand for land to accommodate Auckland’s growth

 

TO a robust investment framework that is focused on increasing benefits to all Aucklanders

Public-owned golf land will be considered in the context of local needs, increased equity, participation and environmental outcomes

 

DELIVERS increased accountability and transparency

 

2

 

FROM publicly owned land used exclusively by golfers

There is competition over access to open space and some Aucklanders are missing out

TO sport and recreation for all Aucklanders

Opening publicly owned golf land to other users with new play spaces, walking, running and cycling paths and other sport and recreation activities

 

DELIVERS increased equity and sport and recreation participation rates

 

3

 

FROM asset-based investment in traditional mid-level (development) golf courses

Auckland golf courses meet the needs of a relatively narrow segment of population[5]

TO a broad golf service offering across the network that appeals to a wider group of people

Providing a broad range of golf experiences and pathways that attract and retain participants with services targeted at low participation groups

 

DELIVERS increased equity and golf participation rates

 

4

 

FROM variable environmental management of publicly owned golf land

Some golf courses are high users of water, fertilisers, pesticides and energy

 

TO best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation that meets clearly defined targets

A kaitiakitanga framework ensures publicly owned golf land is environmentally sustainable, energy neutral and carbon positive

 

DELIVERS increased natural and environmental benefits

 

33.     If the draft plan is adopted, these changes can be implemented as leases end, or by agreement with current leaseholders.

Decision-makers will consider a range of evidence and options before any future investment

34.     The draft plan sets out a clear decision-making framework to guide and inform any future investment and leasing decisions. Its sets out clear objectives and expectations about the public benefits sought from publicly owned golf land.

35.     Decisions will be informed by an indicative business case with a full range of policy options assessed against the plan’s investment objectives and principles. This will help inform decisions that local boards make about golf leases.

36.     Development of the indicative business cases will commence three to five years prior to the end of a current lease for golf courses on publicly owned land. Eight of these leases end before 2028.

 

Figure 2: Proposed decision-making framework (see page 21 of Attachment A for a larger version)

Timeline

Description automatically generated

Future investment decisions will involve the governing body and local boards

37.     If the golf investment plan is adopted, the governing body and local boards will work together to implement the plan. This process will adapt to any changes made to current allocated decision-making responsibilities.

38.     Currently the governing body makes strategic decisions concerning asset ownership and future investment to increase sport and recreation opportunities for all Aucklanders. Local boards make decisions on the use of publicly owned land, including leases, and the development of open space to meet community needs.

39.     During the development of indicative business cases for individual publicly owned golf land, joint working groups can be set up to consider policy options and implementation requirements. This would ensure close collaboration between decision-makers.

There are some trade-offs associated with adopting the plan and the key shifts

40.     Key Shift 1 (a robust investment framework) means taking a consistent regional approach to future decision-making rather than making one-off decisions as current leases end. It also means that a full range of policy options will be considered as part of an indicative business case, rather than simply going through a new lease process.

41.     Implementation will require a joint approach involving the governing body and local boards, reflecting and adapting to changing decision-making allocated to local boards.

42.     Key Shift 2 (sport and recreation for all Aucklanders) means making space for other sport and recreation activities on publicly owned golf land.

43.     In most cases, it is anticipated that these activities can co-exist alongside golf on publicly owned land.

44.     Key Shift 3 (a broad golf service offering) could mean making changes to the types of services or facilities available. For example, a driving range and an introductory golf could be provided in place of an existing 18-hole golf course.

45.     Any such change would have varied support between new and experienced golfers.

46.     Key Shift 4 (sustainable environmental practices) means that all golf courses on publicly owned land will need to meet a minimum environmental benchmark.

47.     Six golf courses on publicly owned land would not currently meet this benchmark.

48.     Some of them are participating in a pilot run by Auckland Council’s Infrastructure and Environmental Services department to improve environmental practices, but decisions may need to be made as to whether additional council support is provided.

There are strengths and weaknesses to the plan

49.     There are strengths and weaknesses to the draft plan as well as some limitations and constraints (see Table 1).

50.     A strength of the draft plan is how it has built on public engagement in 2016. The majority of public respondents to a council discussion document sought increased access publicly owned golf land. They supported walking, running and cycling trails. They also supported use of an environmental auditing tool.

51.     Other key strengths are the proposed public value approach and strategic alignment with the Auckland and Māori Plans. It also builds on golf sector strategies and plans.

52.     The main weakness is that the draft plan relied on publicly available golf participation data (up to and including data from 2020). Golf New Zealand has subsequently provided more up-to-date data, which shows increases in participation over the last two years.

53.     Another weakness is that the draft plan does not specify any level of future council investment. Decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis as leases end. This will allow council to make timely decisions based on community needs as participation trends will change over time. This may however create uncertainty for leaseholders and the wider golf sector.

54.    

Table 1: High-level analysis of the merits of the draft plan

Strengths

 

The draft Auckland golf investment plan takes a public value approach. It focuses decision-making on how to manage publicly owned golf land to benefit all Aucklanders. This means carefully considering how council can achieve equity, participation and environmental outcomes.

He tangata    
Impacts for aucklanders

The draft plan demonstrates how it meaningfully contributes to broader strategy, including the Auckland Plan and Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Plan.

It aligns with the five key directions that reflect the overarching goals or aspirations of mana whenua and mataawaka as outlined in the Māori Plan.

It also supports the vision of the Auckland regional golf strategy and draws upon Golf New Zealand strategies and programmes, including Golf for Life and OnCourse New Zealand.

Weaknesses

 

The draft plan relied on publicly available golf participation data (up to and including data from 2020).

Golf New Zealand has subsequently provided more up-to-date data, which shows increases in participation over the last two years.

The plan does not specify any level of future council investment in golf.

Decisions will be made on a case-by-case basis as leases end. This will allow council to make decisions based on community needs at the time as participation trends will change over time.

This may create uncertainty for current leaseholders and the wider golf sector. However, the plan does clearly indicate what council will invest in and how it will invest.

Constraints

 

Implementation is constrained by long-term leases granted by legacy councils. As leases end council can consider options to increase the benefits from publicly owned golf land. Service level agreements with agreed participation and environmental targets can be included in any future lease terms and conditions if this option is taken.

Staff can provide support to golf courses if they agree to implement the plan before the end of their leases.

Implementation would require complementary decisions of the governing body and local boards in accordance with their allocated decision-making responsibilities.

Joint working parties can ensure that indicative business cases take both governing body and local boards views into consideration.

A picture containing clipart

Description automatically generated

A picture containing text, clipart

Description automatically generated

Limitations

 

There is a lack of up-to-date and statistically significant sport and recreation participation data across demographic groups, including ethnicity, gender and age.

Publicly available golf participation data is limited.

Staff will look at ways to fill this data gap in order to support ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the plan.

Data sharing by leaseholders and the golf sector will be critical to understand participation trends and to inform needs assessments as part of the indicative business cases.

A picture containing chart

Description automatically generated

We are engaging again with Aucklanders to get their views

55.     Staff are engaging with Aucklanders, the sport and recreation sector as well as golf clubs and leaseholders to get their views on the draft plan.

56.     A range of mechanisms were used to engage the public, including the People’s Panel survey and public submissions to the Have Your Say consultation, with a cross section of Aucklanders providing feedback.

·        Have Your Say engagement ran from 23 March to 20 April 2022. A total of 1,076 people provided feedback on the draft plan. A broad range of ages, ethnicities and locations were represented. However, a large proportion was older, male Pākeha/New Zealand European respondents, or from the Albert-Eden, Devonport-Takapuna and Ōrākei local board areas.

·        The People’s Panel ran from 7 to 12 April 2022. A total of 1,070 people completed the survey. A broad range of ages, ethnicities and locations were represented in the feedback.

57.     Consultation with the sport and recreation sector as well as golf clubs and leaseholders through a series of virtual meetings ran until 27 May 2022.

58.     A memo outlining a summary of the feedback to the draft plan will be provided to the local boards prior to their June business meeting.

The views of Aucklanders in 2022 varied on the draft plan

59.     Feedback from the Peoples Panel and Have Your Say varied (see Figure 3):

·     51 per cent of the Peoples Panel ‘support’ the overall goal to ensure that all Aucklanders benefit from publicly owned golf land. A further 28 per cent ‘partially support’ this goal.

·     59 per cent of Have Your Say respondents ‘don’t support’ the plan.


 

Figure 3: Summary of public feedback

People’s Panel: Goal to ensure all Aucklanders benefit

Chart type: Clustered Bar. 'Field1': 1 Support has noticeably higher 'Field2'.

Description automatically generated

Have Your Say: Overall opinion on the draft plan

Chart type: Pie. 'Field2' by 'Field1'

Description automatically generated

People’s Panel

62% Support

19% Partially support

15% Don’t support

 

44% Support

30% Partially support

20% Don’t support

 

72% Support

16% Partially support

9% Don’t support

 

54% Support

24% Partially support

14% Don’t support

 

62% Support

20% Partially support

15% Don’t support

 

40% Support

32% Partially support

20% Don’t support

 

70% Support

18% Partially support

9% Don’t support

 

 

Policy Objective 1 (increasing public access)

 

Policy Objective 2 (a broad range of golf experiences)

 

Policy Objective 3 (ecosystem management and biodiversity)

 

Key Shift 1 (a robust investment framework)

 

Key Shift 2 (sport and recreation for all Aucklanders)

 

Key Shift 3 (a broad golf service offering)

 

Key Shift 4 (sustainable environmental practices)

 

Have Your Say

21% Support

19% Partially support

59% Don’t support

 


28% Support

32% Partially support

36% Don’t support

 

53% Support

21% Partially support

22% Don’t support

 

26% Support

24% Partially support

44% Don’t support

 

20% Support

16% Partially support

63% Don’t support

 

21% Support

25% Partially support

47% Don’t support

 

45% Support

21% Partially support

29% Don’t support

60.     There is support across both groups of respondents for the environmental aspects of the plan, in particular Policy Objective 3 (best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation).

61.     On most other aspects of the plan there were opposing views between respondents to the Peoples Panel’s survey and the Have Your Say consultation.

The sport and recreation sector supports the focus on increasing equity and participation

62.     Initial feedback from the sport and recreation sector supports the focus on increasing equity and participation in sport and recreation for all Aucklanders as well as golf.

63.     They also welcome opportunities for new play spaces, walking, jogging and cycling paths.

The golf sector opposes the draft plan in its current form

64.     The golf sector has indicated that they oppose the draft plan in its current form. They are concerned that the draft plan does not reflect the current situation.

65.     Golf New Zealand provided evidence that participation rates have increased in recent years and suggested that further investment is required to meet the needs for golf in the future.

To date golf leaseholders have told us that the draft plan gives them more certainty and they are doing many of the things it seeks to achieve

66.     Golf leaseholders that staff have spoken with to date think that the draft plan gives them more certainty as to what council would invest in and transparency over future decision-making processes.

67.     They also noted that they were already doing many of the things outlined in the plan, including growing participation among young people and women, broadening their golf service offering and increasing environmental benefits.

Staff will analyse all the submissions and will look at what changes need to be made

68.     Staff will analyse all the submissions made on the draft plan and will look at what changes need to be made to the document. This includes updating golf participation data.

Staff recommend that local boards support the draft plan

69.     Staff recommend that you support the adoption of this plan.

70.     There will be increased accountability and transparency from an outcome-focused investment approach and a clear decision-making framework.

71.     If adopted, the plan will help increase Aucklander’s access to publicly owned land.

72.     It will also help increase equity and participation in sport and recreation, including golf.

73.     Increased natural and environmental benefits will come from a kaitiakitanga framework with ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

The draft plan aligns with Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Plan

74.     Getting better environmental outcomes from the 535 hectares of open space currently allocated to golf is critical to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Action Plan.

75.     A kaitiakitanga framework will ensure golf courses employ best practice in ecosystem management and biodiversity conservation.

76.     If the draft plan is adopted, leaseholders will need to meet a minimum benchmark covering:

·     ecology

·     landscape and cultural heritage

·     energy consumption and waste reduction

·     water resource

·     climate change

·     pollution prevention

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

77.     Eke Panuku Development Auckland will need to ensure that decision-making on any leases is made in accordance with the plan if it is adopted.

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

Local impacts and local board views

There is inequity across age, gender and ethnic groups and people living with disabilities

78.     Not all Aucklanders have the same opportunities to participate in sport and recreation or to play golf:

·     there is inequity for people living with disabilities

·     Asian and Pacific Aucklanders have lower sport and recreation participation rates

·     women and young people have lower golf participation rates.

Local boards have been briefed on the draft plan and their views are now sought

79.     The draft plan sets out a clear decision-making framework to guide and inform any future investment and leasing decisions. Its sets out clear objectives and expectations about the public benefits sought from publicly owned golf land.

80.     If the draft plan is adopted, the governing body and local board allocated decision-making responsibilities will work together to implement the plan. This process will adapt to any changes made to current allocated decision-making responsibilities.

81.     Currently the governing body makes strategic decisions concerning asset ownership and future investment to increase sport and recreation opportunities for all Aucklanders. Local boards make decisions on the use of publicly owned land, including leases, and the development of open space to meet community needs.

82.     Joint working groups to consider policy options and implementation requirements as part of the development of indicative business cases can ensure close collaboration between investment and lease decisions.

83.     Staff held a local board member briefing on 4 April 2022, providing an overview of the draft plan and responded to questions.

84.     This report provides an overview of the draft plan as well as a high-level summary of public feedback. It seeks a formal view on the draft plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

85.     The draft plan aligns with the five key directions that reflect the overarching goals or aspirations of mana whenua and mataawaka as set-out in the Māori Plan:

·     Whanaungatanga / Access to public facilities 

·     Rangatiratanga / Māori are actively involved in decision-making and management of natural resources

·     Manaakitanga / Access to clean parks and reserves

·     Wairuatanga / Indigenous flora and fauna

·     Kaitiakitanga / Māori are kaitiaki of the environment.

86.     Mana whenua have been provided with a summary of the draft plan and public feedback to assist with their decision-making process about providing feedback.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

87.     There are no financial implications to the local board for any decision to support the draft plan, its policy objectives and the decision-making framework it outlines.

88.     If the draft plan is adopted, the costs of undertaking indicative business cases would be funded within existing department budget.

89.     The financial implications of any decisions recommended through individual indicative business cases would be outlined at the relevant time.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

90.     Adoption of a plan for future council investment in golf manages risk as well as increasing transparency and accountability.

91.     If the governing body and local boards follow the indicative business case process and decision-making framework, then there would be a low risk of legal challenge.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

92.     The Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee to consider adoption of the plan in August 2022. The agenda report will include local board feedback.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Draft Golf Investment Plan Attachment A

251

b

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Draft Golf Investment Plan Attachment B

489

c

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Draft Golf Investment Plan Attachment C

603

d

20 June 2022 - Howick Local Board - Draft Golf Investment Plan Attachment D

611

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Denise Gunn - Democracy Advisor

Aubrey Bloomfield - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Kataraina Maki - General Manager - Community and Social Policy

Carole Canler - Senior Policy Manager, Community Investment

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator







PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator












Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Approval for a new private road name at 29 & 31 Challinor Street, Pakuranga Auckland 2010

File No.: CP2022/06621

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval from the Howick Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 29 & 31 Challinor Street, Pakuranga.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the Guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider /developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the Local Board’s approval.

3.       The developer and applicant, Insight, Leo Ltd has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the Local Board.

4.       The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the Standards). The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana Whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the Guidelines.

5.       The proposed names for the new private road at 29 & 31 Challinor Street, Pakuranga are:

·    Seaside Place (Applicant Preferred)

·    Waterdown Lane (Alternative 1)

·    Wateredge Court (Alternative 2)

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      approves the name Seaside Place (applicant’s preferred name) for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 29 & 31 Challinor Street in Pakuranga, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (road naming reference RDN90098521 and resource consent references BUN60359101 and SUB60359103).

Horopaki

Context

6.       Resource consent reference BUN60359101 (subdivision reference number SUB60359103) was issued on 9 April 2021 for the creation of twelve fee simple residential allotments and one commonly owned access lots (COAL).

7.       Site and location plans of the development can be found in Attachment A.

8.       In accordance with the Standards, any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

9.       Therefore, in this development, the new COAL requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen on page two in Attachment A, where the COAL that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10.     The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the 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 Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

12.     Theme: The proposed road names are chosen because the development /subdivision is within close proximity to the coast.

Proposed name

Meaning (as described by applicant)

Seaside Place (Applicant preferred)

“Because the properties are near the water so we give these names”

Waterdown Lane (Alternative 1)

“Because the properties are near the water so we give these names”

Wateredge Court (Alternative 2)

“Because the properties are near the water so we give these names”

 

13.     Assessment: All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the Guidelines and the Standards in respect of road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been met and duplicate names are not located in close proximity.  It is therefore for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

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

15.     Road Type: ‘Place’, ‘Lane’ and ‘Court’ are acceptable road types for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18.     The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the Council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19.     The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20.     To aid local board decision making, the Guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate.   The Guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

21.     On 21 April 2022, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

·    Te Kawerau ā Maki

·    Te Ākitai Waiohua

·    Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

·    Ngāi Tai Ki Tamaki

·    Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

·    Ngāti Paoa Trust Board

·    Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust

·    Ngāti Maru

·    Ngāti Tamaterā

·    Waikato-Tainui

·    Ngāti Whanaunga

·    Te Patukirikiri

22.     By the close of the consultation period, no responses, comments, or feedback were received. Depending on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

23.     This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua and no Te Reo Māori names are proposed.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24.     The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the 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 component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27.     Approved road names are notified to LINZ which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Location and Site Plan

925

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Elizabeth Salter - Subdivision Technical Officer

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Lloyd Elsmore Park Playspace Service Assessment Findings

File No.: CP2022/06918

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the findings of the Lloyd Elsmore Park wheeled play and playspace service assessment (Sharepoint #1653 $10,000 LDI Opex).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Lloyd Elsmore Park was identified as a high priority for investment in the adopted Howick Playground Mapping Analysis and Advice Document (Resolution HW/2021/64 FY2020/2021) because of its strategic location, connectivity and capacity for improvement. The mapping document identified the following play service outcomes for inclusion in the playspace redevelopment:

·   destination playspace

·   wheeled play (skate, learn to ride, mountain bike)

·   accessible play

·   youth specific play and gathering space

·   exercise and fitness

·   family-friendly gathering space.

3.       In FY2021/2022 the local board provided $10,000 LDI opex to engage mana whenua, park stakeholders’ and the local community to provide feedback on the identified play service outcomes to help inform the redevelopment of the play facilities at the park.

4.       Engagement feedback provided strong support for the service outcomes that underpin the need for the development of a destination playspace at Lloyd Elsmore Park. This development could provide a range of play facilities with supporting infrastructure to enable extended park visits that attracts users from across the board area and beyond. 

5.       The feedback included detailed information on specialist play facilities including; skate and wheeled play, accessible play, exercise facilities, youth play needs and supporting infrastructure (see Table 1). In addition, the feedback also revealed the need to improve existing facilities at the park and retain the open space for passive recreation use.

6.       It is recommended that the local board approves the service outcomes in table 1 to inform a Community Facilities led concept plan for the development of a destination playspace and wheeled play hub at Lloyd Elsmore Park as part of their FY2022/2023 work programme.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      Approves the following play outcomes and themes to inform a Community Facilities developed concept plan to create a play and wheeled play hub at Lloyd Elsmore Park:

i)    Wheeled play

ii)   Youth zone

iii)   Exercise

iv)  Accessibility

v)   Family zone

vi)  Improvements to existing facilities

vii) Safety

viii) Open pace retention

ix)  Co-location of facilities.

Horopaki

Context

7.       Howick Local Board has a population of 130,000 people making it New Zealand’s sixth-largest urban area (2018 Census). Population growth, new housing and intensified living combined with improved transport connectivity will increase demand for access to quality local parks and playspaces.

8.       There are 70 playspaces across the Howick Local Board area, but there are no destination playspaces that provide a range of play experiences for broad age groups and abilities.

9.       Lloyd Elsmore Park is a strategically located high-value park within the Howick Local Board’s network. It is highly accessible being served by adjacent arterial road corridors, public transport and, walking and cycling connections. It is anticipated that when complete, the Eastern Busway will further increase visitation by providing improved connectivity to the park from across Auckland.

10.     Lloyd Elsmore Park provides access to a wide range of recreational provision including formal sports fields and clubs, two playgrounds, a skate bowl, mountain bike track, aquatic centre, splash pad and is home to the Howick Historical Village. It is one of the largest sports parks in Auckland attracting thousands of visitors weekly to engage in sports and informal play or to connect with nature and enjoy the large expanse of open space.

11.     However, the skate park, Rotary Centennial Bike Trail and the playground located near the swimming pool are aged, provide low recreational appeal and are no longer fit for purpose.

12.     In 2021 the local board adopted the Howick Playground Mapping Analysis and Advice Document which identified current play provision and network gaps across Howick Local Board’s 70 playspaces. The findings identified Lloyd Elsmore Park as a high priority for investment and made recommendations to improve the playground to provide the following play outcomes:

·   destination playspace

·   wheeled play (skate, learn to ride, mountain bike)

·   accessible play

·   youth specific play and gathering space

·   exercise and fitness

·   family-friendly gathering space.

13.     In response to this, the local board in FY2021/2022 provided $10,000 LDI opex to engage mana whenua, park stakeholders and the local community to provide feedback on the identified play service outcomes to inform the redevelopment of the play facilities at the park.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Consultation & Engagement Process

14.     The adopted 2021 Howick Playground Mapping Analysis and Advice Document identified play service outcomes for Lloyd Elsmore Park based on network gaps in play provision. This information formed the basis to engage mana whenua, park stakeholders and the community on the redevelopment of the wheeled-play and playspace based facilities at the park.

15.     A total of seven rounds of mana whenua and stakeholder consultation were held to seek feedback on the service assessment.

16.     The following consultation and engagement process was applied:

·   November 2021 – Round one stakeholder consultation through the Lloyd Elsmore Park User Group. Additional individual meetings were held with the East Skate Club and Mountain Raiders who provided detailed feedback.

·   November/December 2021 – Round one mana whenua engagement through the Parks, Sports & Recreation Mana Whenua Forum and included additional individual sessions.

·   February/March 2022 - Community consultation through Have Your Say resulting in over 270 written submissions.

·   March 2022 – Round two Mana Whenua engagement to provide oversight of the results of the community and stakeholder consultation.

·   June 2022 – Stakeholder and Mana Whenua update following local board approval of service outcomes.

 

Consultation and Engagement – Summary of Results

17.     The following table identifies recurring themes and outcomes identified through the consultation and engagement process:

#

Play outcome

Description

1

Wheeled Play

·    Skate park with vert ramps, mini-ramps and half-pipes

·    Flat circular path around the skate park edge for scooters, blades and roller skates (provides for various disciplines, examples include Mangawhai Activity Zone & Masterton Skate Park)

·    Pump/bump track located near skate facility

·    Learn to ride for young children – located away from the skate park

·    Rotary Centennial Bike Trail upgrade

2

Youth Zone

·    Dedicated hang-out and sheltered gathering space (away from the family and picnic zone) near wheeled play facilities

·    Large play items (mega swings)

·    Parkour

·    Basketball

3

Exercise

·    Parkour

·    Basketball

·    Outdoor gym circuit and plyometrics (not stand-alone gym equipment – not popular)

4

Accessibility

·    Play items that enable caregivers and children with wide ranging access needs to experience play (provision for physical and mental needs and to include autism)

·    Tactile stimuli and sound play

·    Barrier-free connecting pathways

·    Inclusive shaded seating (wheelchair friendly, arm & backrests)

·    Accessible toilets and car parking

5

Family Zone

·    Sheltered seating and picnic spaces located near young children’s playspace

·    Children’s playspace for 0-8 years (potentially fenced)

·    Senior playspace (9-12 years) challenging and with a point of difference (high towers, large slides, etc.)

·    Playspace that target specific age groups

6

Improvements to existing facilities

·    Duck Pond cleaned, planted, made visually attractive and safer

·    Marble Run – redeveloped and improved

·    Creek – education, connection and improvement opportunities

7

Safety

·    Vehicles – traffic calming measures (speed bumps)

·    Pathway connectivity – connecting pathways to improve safety and provide alternative transport corridors

·    Fenced young children’s playspace – perceived risk from young children interacting with wheeled play facilities

8

Open Space

·    The open space at the park is highly valued and must be retained to provide flexible passive recreation space

9

Co-location of

facilities

·    Strong support to co-locate the play and wheeled play facilities to create a play hub

·    A need to keep the skate/wheeled play apart from young children’s playground for safety reasons.

Table 1. Service Outcomes based on community, mana whenua and park stakeholder feedback

18.     Lloyd Elsmore Park stakeholders, mana whenua and the community provided strong support for the play service outcomes which underpin the need for a destination playspace that provides a range of play facilities with supporting infrastructure to enable extended park visits. 

19.     Frequent references were made to the Mangawhai Activity Zone as an example of a high-quality destination wheeled-play and playspace hub that provides for wide-ranging age groups and skill sets in a family-friendly environment. In addition, Masterton Skate Park was presented as an exemplar skate facility.

20.     Consultation feedback also sought accessibility within the playspace and supporting infrastructure. Inclusive play provision for children with physical and mental needs, the vision impaired and consideration given to providing for adults and caregivers to access and participate in the play experience. Outcomes include; barrier-free pathways into the playspace, wheelchair accessible sheltered seating and picnic areas, drinking fountains and accessible toilet provision.

21.     Feedback provided strong support to co-locate the wheeled and play facilities in a localised area of the park to improve connectivity and visual surveillance for parents and caregivers of children using different play facilities.

22.     While it was considered that co-located facilities would generally improve the overall visitor experience and support extended park visits, this aspiration was tempered with a need to protect young children from injury by preventing access to advanced skate and wheeled play facilities. In addition, the skate community were generally supportive of co-located facilities however, their primary goal is the development of a cutting-edge skate facility.

23.     Feedback from respondents articulated the need to protect and preserve the open space at the reserve. Many visitors enjoy using the passive open space for a variety of purposes including informal sports, walking and connecting with nature or as a picnic space. The design of a destination playspace will need to consider how best to retain and maximise the existing open space values at the park while also developing a high-quality destination playspace.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

24.     There is scope to reduce the impact of climate change through the delivery of the report findings by using sustainable construction material and practices. The selection of locally sourced, hard-wearing material will help reduce carbon production and extend the working life of the asset while offering resistance against vandals and wilful damage.

25.     Investing in destination play experiences located in densely populated residential catchments near public and active transport connections will help reduce carbon emissions. 

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     The local board and Community Facilities provided feedback (as articulated in paragraph 6 of this report) on the Howick Playground Mapping Analysis and Advice Document which was adopted in 2021. The play outcomes formed the basis of the Lloyd Elsmore Park wheeled and play service assessment consultation documents which mana whenua and the community provided detailed feedback on.  

27.     The play outcomes based on consultation feedback and identified in Table 1 will act as a guide for Community Facilities to redevelop the wheeled and play facilities at Lloyd Elsmore Park to provide improved play provision and fill identified network gaps. The local board may, at its discretion, provide LDI capital expenditure (capex) at times to address gaps in provision through a top-up of the renewal budget.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28.     The local board provided feedback on the service assessment scope during a workshop in August 2021 and support for the assessment findings at a May 2022 workshop. At the workshop, the board requested the inclusion of play for children with spectrum disorders and autism to form part of the service outcomes.

29.     In addition, the board also requested that specialist advice is sought to inform the development of specific play elements including accessible play, skate and parkour facilities.

30.     Approval of the outcomes identified in Table 1 will support the delivery of the following Local Board Plan 2020 aspiration; Parks and facilities that meet our people’s needs.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31.     Parks and reserves are taonga and hold significant importance to mana whenua. Developing a network of playgrounds that provide for all ages and abilities will positively benefit the health and wellbeing of mana whenua and the wider community through increased recreation provision.

32.     Through a series of hui, mana whenua provided detailed advice to inform the play service assessment outcomes at a local and network level. Mana whenua will provide further support on the next phase of the playspace redevelopment programme managed by Community Facilities.  

33.     Partnering with mana whenua through the play service assessment process has enabled delivery of the following outcome identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance 2021 – 2025 document: ‘Māori cultural values, history and heritage are reflected within the built environment through design, architecture and the inclusion of uniquely Māori design principles in public space’.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     The approved Community Facilities three-year work programme identifies the following funding for Lloyd Elsmore Park play facilities:

Project

Year

Funding

Active recreation components review

FY2021/2022

$20,000 (potential deferral)

Skate park renewal

FY2022/2023

FY2023/2024

$250,000

$500,000

 

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.     Approval of the outcomes identified in Table 1 will help steer the redevelopment of wheeled-play and playspace facilities at Lloyd Elsmore Park but may also raise community expectations that the local board will fund development of the facility in the short-term.

36.     Some outcomes identified in Table 1 may rely on being addressed through LDI capex investment top up. This may result in gaps in provision being partially improved only, depending on the availability of discretionary funding.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37.     If approved, the service outcomes in Table 1 will inform a Community Facilities led destination playspace concept plan as part of their FY2022/2023 work programme.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Steve Owens - Parks and Places Specialist

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Community Facilities Network Plan revised Action Plan (2022)

File No.: CP2022/05373

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To present the revised Community Facilities Network Plan Action Plan (2022) including progress and completion of actions since 2015 and prioritisation of actions over the next three years.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP) is a strategic document outlining how Auckland Council will invest in community facilities. It was approved by Regional Strategy and Policy Committee in August 2015.

3.       The accompanying Action Plan prioritises actions and projects that will be undertaken to implement the CFNP. The CFNP contains criteria for identifying and prioritising actions. 

4.       Every three years the Action Plan is reviewed and updated to recognise progress, revise priorities of existing actions and assess potential new actions. The Action Plan was last updated in 2019.

5.       The Action Plan has been revised for 2022 using the methodology outlined in the CFNP. It contains 33 new actions.

6.       There are now 155 total actions in the Action Plan including:

·    65 completed actions

·    36 actions underway

·    50 actions to start

·    4 actions on hold.

7.       Implementation of priority actions within the revised Action Plan will initially focus on:

·    completing 36 actions that are already underway

·    starting four new area-based actions located in Investment Priority Areas

·    starting two network-wide strategic improvement actions.

8.       Feedback from local boards will be part of the report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in August 2022 (when considering the adoption of the Action Plan).

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)   support the revised Community Facilities Network Plan Action Plan (2022), provided in Attachment A.

 

 

 

Horopaki

Context

What is the Community Facilities Network Plan and Action Plan?

9.       The Community Facilities Network Plan and its companion Action Plan were approved in 2015 by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee (REG/2015/57).

10.     The Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP) guides the council’s investment in the provision of community facilities and services. It provides direction on the development of new facilities, major upgrades of existing facilities, optimisation, and potential divestment of facilities no longer meeting community needs.

11.     The CFNP addresses provision for:

·    arts and culture facilities

·    community centres

·    libraries

·    pools and leisure facilities

·    venues for hire (community or rural halls).

12.     The CFNP’s accompanying Action Plan prioritises projects to:

·    ensure existing facilities are fit for purpose

·    address gaps or duplication in provision and needs for community facilities

·    meet future demand arising from population growth and changing users’ expectations.

13.     Together the CFNP and its companion Action Plan support council’s goal to focus community service investment on:

·    quality over quantity

·    addressing service gaps where growth is significant

·    improving portfolio performance.

The Action Plan is revised every three years

14.     Every three years the Action Plan is reviewed and updated to recognise progress, revise priorities of existing actions and assess potential new actions.

15.     The Action Plan was last reviewed in 2018 and adopted by the Environment and Community Committee in April 2019 (ENV/2019/47).

16.     Progress on the Action Plan is reported annually to the relevant committees. The last update was provided to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee in November 2021 (PAC/2021/58).

17.     A summary of progress on the revised 2022 Action Plan is provided in Attachment B. It shows that 65 actions are completed, 36 actions are underway, 50 actions have not started, and 4 actions are on hold.

Actions are structured by category, theme and progress 

18.     There are three categories and two themes of actions in the Action Plan (refer Table 1).

Table 1: CFNP Action Plan categories

19.     The 2022 Action Plan presents actions in two parts.

·    Part A – new actions (identified since the last review) and actions carried over from the previous review which have not been started.

·    Part B – actions underway at the time of the review and previously completed actions.

Departments work together to identify business and strategic improvement actions

20.     The development of new business and strategic improvements involved Community & Social Policy, Community Facilities, and Regional Service Planning, Investment & Partnerships. These departments worked together to support quality advice and to improve the way we plan and prioritise delivery of community services.

The identification of area-based actions follows a set process

21.     The process for the development of area-based actions in Part A of the 2022 Action Plan is set by the CFNP and shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Review process for 2022 CFNP Action Plan

 

22.     Potential area-based actions for Part A were identified from a range of sources:

·    political resolutions requesting the addition of items to the Action Plan

·    work arising from completed actions in the Action Plan 2019

·    the 10-year Budget 2021-2031

·    local board plan initiatives and work programmes

·    input from business intelligence and across the Auckland Council organisation

·    actions not started in the Action Plan 2019.

Area-based actions are prioritised through the weighting of network, community, and building criteria

23.     Once identified, the master list of area-based actions was assessed based on the prioritisation criteria outlined in section 5.2 of the CFNP (refer Table 2).

Table 2: Prioritisation criteria for area-based actions as defined by the CFNP

24.     The tools used to conduct the assessment included population data, geospatial information, asset condition information, and in some instances needs assessments and business cases.

The priorities in the CFNP Action Plan guide the focus of our resources

25.     The impact of Covid-19 and the resulting economic slow-down has had a significant impact on the council’s revenue and borrowing capacity. The 10-year Budget (Recovery Budget), adopted 29 June 2021, highlights:

·    a tight fiscal environment for the immediate future

·    the need to reduce capital expenditure across the council family

·    reprioritisation of projects

·    the unsustainability of maintaining the current community facility network while meeting the needs of growing and changing communities.

26.     The ‘focused investment’ approach for community investment, adopted as part of the 10-year Budget, means we must focus on renewing priority assets, reducing our asset portfolio, expanding provision of tailored/alternative service delivery models and exploring partnership opportunities.

27.     The approach for community investment supports the direction of the CFNP and in this constrained environment, priority actions determined by the criteria in the CFNP are guiding the focus of our resources.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The revised CFNP Action Plan 2022

28.     The revised Action Plan 2022 is provided in Attachment A.

29.     Table 3 shows the distribution of all actions in the Action Plan 2022 and progress of actions since the Community Facilities Network Plan was adopted in 2015.

Table 3: Summary of the 2022 CFNP Action Plan

30.     Attachment B shows the progress status of the revised 2022 Action Plan, as well as the distribution of actions across local boards, service type and priority status.

31.     The progress being made on actions demonstrates staff’s commitment to focusing resources on a collectively agreed and mandated programme of work, as well as the commitment to delivering agreed priorities in a constrained environment.

The focus of the CFNP Action Plan work programme 2022/2023

32.     The focus of next year’s work will be towards completing priority actions that; are already in progress, are located in Investment Priority Areas (identified in the 10-year Budget) or are strategic improvements with a network-wide reach (refer Table 4).

33.     This focus ensures our effort is scalable and our advice about investment in community facilities is more effective. The efficiency created will allow us to concentrate on the priority actions that have not yet been started.

Table 4: Summary of proposed work programme for 2022/2023

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

34.     Consideration of climate impact happens at a project level. There are no direct climate impacts arising from this report on the action plan.

35.     Future detailed business cases will include application of the Community Facilities – Sustainable Asset Policy. The regional policy, the first of three phases under the council’s Sustainable Asset Standard (SAS), commits council to:

·    achieve carbon neutrality in operations for new asset development

·    achieve a minimum 5-Star Green Star rating (or equivalent certification) on the development of all new assets with a budget over $10 million

·    incorporate decarbonisation principles into guideline documents for renewals and new asset development of all community assets.

36.     The assessment of climate impacts in investigations and business cases will improve by applying learnings from across the organisation in its responsiveness to climate change. Staff will also seek to understand the allowances that need to be made to meet climate impact targets for Action Plan projects related to the development of new facilities, or the improvement of existing facilities.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37.     During the development of the Action Plan 2022 input has been sought from the following departments:

·    Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships

·    Local Board Services

·    Parks Sports and Recreation

·    Financial and Business Performance

·    Connected Communities

·    Community Facilities

·    Community and Social Policy.

38.     Delivery of the Action Plan 2022 is resourced by council’s Community & Social Policy and Regional Service Planning, Investment & Partnerships teams subject to capacity. Individual actions are delivered with participation from other departments and, where relevant, Eke Panuku Development Auckland.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39.     Local boards provided feedback on direction and specific content during the development of the Community Facilities Network Plan and Action Plan prior to adoption in 2015. 

40.     Key initiatives from local board plans (2020) were an input of the review process for the development of the 2022 CFNP Action Plan (refer Figure 1).

41.     The CFNP’s prioritisation criteria applies the highest weighting of 15 per cent to local board priority to ensure local board’s views influence the overall assessment of actions. 

42.     Progressing area-based actions are reflected in relevant local board work programmes. Local boards provide feedback and input throughout the investigations and have decision making responsibilities as per schedule the 10-year Budget 2021-31

43.     Decision-making for service provision and location sits with local boards within funding parameters set by the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44.     The Community Facilities Network Plan outlines, in Section 2.2, how it will deliver on Māori outcomes. These outcomes include:

·    engage with Māori organisations to understand Māori expectations and investigate the community needs of Māori groups, and factor this into decision-making for community facilities

·    actively engage and consult to ensure the planning, development, and operations of facilities consider Māori needs and aspirations

·    work closely with Māori groups and key stakeholders, including local iwi, to develop appropriate cultural programmes to be delivered through facilities

·    investigate Māori demographic participation and usage trends, identifying opportunities to increase the attendance and use of facilities by Māori and developing appropriate business responses

·    provide visual representations of commitment to Māori to tell stories of their connections to the place (such as signage) and honouring tikanga

·    ensure that, in any exploration of potential future sites for facilities, Māori concerns about wāhi tapu are incorporated.

45.     Engagement with Māori is included as part of investigations and continues through the planning and delivery of responses. Examples include:

·    interviews and hui with mana whenua

·    interviews and hui with mataawaka in local settings to understand community needs

·    workshops and focus groups with local marae

·    intercept surveys with representative samples of the Māori population base

·    kanohi ki te kanohi interviews conducted in Te Reo Māori.

 

46.     Feedback provided from Māori is specific to the nature of the investigation for which the engagement occurred. This feedback is used to inform the delivery of options and responses.

47.     Staff will work with other relevant parts of the council to ensure effective engagement with Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48.     There are currently no identified financial implications for the delivery of the Community Facilities Network Plan Action Plan 2022 as work is delivered utilising existing resources.

49.     Investment decisions and associated funding implications are reported separately to the relevant decision-maker(s).

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

50.     There is a risk that development of the Action Plan 2022 may not match local board priorities, as implementation of the Action Plan involves understanding service needs and taking a network view. This risk is mitigated by:

·    continuing to socialise and reinforce the strategic objectives of the CFNP to elected members, key staff, and through all deliverables 

·    clarifying local board plans were reviewed and any potential community service-related content was considered for potential inclusion as an action

·    including One Local Initiative projects into the Action Plan 2022.

51.     There is financial risk that:

·    budget allocated in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 may be insufficient to deliver some of the action findings

·    the need for significant new investment identified from actions will be challenging due to the impact Covid-19 has had on the council’s revenue and borrowing capacity

·    some investigations may require changes to the funding identified in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

52.     This financial risk is mitigated by:

·    ensuring investigations include looking at options for funding other than rates or debt

·    ensuring findings of investigations that require new investment are supported by indicative business cases

·    managing expectations by acknowledging budget constraints

·    managing expectations by acknowledging the delegation for decision-making on investment in new facilities is held by the Governing Body and is considered as part of long-term planning (decision-making for service provision and location sits with local boards within parameters set by the Governing Body).

53.     There is a timing risk that delivery of actions may take longer because of reduced operational capacity and may not align with elected members and/or local communities’ expectations.  This risk is mitigated by driving delivery to meet targeted timeframes for priority actions and managing expectations based on the principles and direction set by the CFNP.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

54.     Local board resolutions will be included in the report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee when they consider adoption of the Action Plan in August 2022.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Attachment A - Community Facilities Network Plan (CFNP)

943

b

Attachment B - Focus of Community Facilities Action Plan 2022

959

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tracey Williams - Service Programmes Lead

Angela Clarke - Head of Service Investment & Programming

Authorisers

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

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 



Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Approval of the Howick Local Board External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme 2022/2023

File No.: CP2022/07044

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To approve the 2022/2023 Howick Local Board External Partnership-Business Associations work programme and its associated budget.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report presents the board’s External Partnership-Business Associations work programme and associated budgets for approval for delivery within the 2022/2023 financial year (see Attachment A).

3.       The work programme responds to the following outcomes and objectives that the local board identified in the Howick Local Board Plan 2020:

·    Outcome 5 - A prosperous local economy supporting business growth and opportunity

4.       The board provided feedback to staff on the projects it would like to fund in a series of workshops. The board indicated its support for the following projects, with budgets as listed below:

·          Supporting BIDs – Howick Village Association Inc $30,000

·          Supporting Bids – Greater East Tamaki Business Association Inc $15,000

5.       The proposed work programme has a total value of $45,000, which can be funded from within the board’s draft locally driven initiatives (LDI)  budget for the 2022/2023 financial year.

6.       Updates on the delivery of this work programme will be provided through the board’s quarterly performance reports.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      approve the External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme 2022/2023. Attachment A.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       Each year, the local board decides which activities to allocate its annual budget toward, through a series of workshops. The local board feedback in these workshops have informed the work programme.

8.       The work programme responds to the outcomes and objectives that the local board identified in the Howick Local Board Plan 2020. The specific outcome that are reflected in the work programme is:

·    Outcome 5 - A prosperous local economy supporting business growth and opportunity.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9.       The proposed activities for delivery as part of the board’s External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme 2022/2023 are detailed below. See Attachment A for further detail.

Supporting BIDs – Howick Village Association Inc (HVA) – $30,000

10.     To continue focusing on delivering their post COVID-19 lockdown business recovery plans, including the implementation for BID members.

Supporting BIDs – Greater East Tamaki Business Association Inc (GETBA) – $15,000

11.     To deliver BID member support to assist in the recovery from COVID-19 lockdown. This will include information and education positioning GETBA to respond to business needs as the post pandemic world unfolds.

12.     Both HVA and GETBA activities align with the board’s following outcome and objective:

·    Outcome 5 - A prosperous local economy supporting business growth and opportunity

·    Objective 5.1 - Support local business recovery from the impacts of COVID-19

13.     HVA and GETBA will present and update of their plans to the local board before the end of the first quarter (September). After local board considerations and feedback has been relieved, a funding agreement will be developed and forward to HVA and GETBA for signing.

14.     The External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme progress will be reported directly to the local board as part of the quarterly local board work programme report produced by Local Board Services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

15.     The proposed work programme does not significantly impact on greenhouse gas emissions or contribute towards adapting to the impacts of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

16.     The work programme was developed through a collaborative approach by operational council departments, with each department represented in the integrated team that presented the draft work programme to the local board at a series of workshops.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17.     The proposed External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme has been considered by the local board in a series of workshops from October 2021 to May 2022. The views expressed by local board members during the workshops have informed the recommended work programme.

18.     The activities in the proposed work programme align with the Howick Local Board Plan 2020 outcomes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19.     Individual business associations may, through operating their BID programme, identify opportunities for niche support or development of any Māori business sector in their business area.

20.     Where aspects of the proposed work programme are anticipated to have a significant impact on activity of importance to Māori, then appropriate engagement will be undertaken.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21.     The proposed External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme budget for 2022/2023 is $45,000 of the boards locally driven initiatives (LDI) operational budget. This amount can be accommodated within the board’s total draft budget for 2022/2023.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

22.     Table 1 shows the identified significant risks associated with activities in the proposed 2022/2023 work programme.

Table 1: Significant risks and mitigations for activities

Activity name

Risk

Mitigation

Rating after mitigation

Supporting Howick Village Association

Not implementing the planned initiatives.

Quarterly reporting on progress

Low

Supporting Greater East Tamaki Business Association

Not implementing the planned initiatives.

Quarterly reporting on progress

Low

 

23.     Where a work programme activity cannot be completed on time or to budget, due to unforeseen circumstances, this will be signalled to the local board at the earliest opportunity.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24.     Delivery of the activity in the approved work programme will commence on 1 July 2022 and continue until 30 June 2023. Activity progress will be reported to the local board on a quarterly basis.

25.     Where the work programme identifies further decisions and milestones for each activity, these will be brought to the local board when appropriate.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Howick Local Board External Partnerships-Business Associations work programme 22-23

967

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Claire Siddens - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager - CCO Governance & External Partnerships

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator



Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

Howick Quick Response Round Two 2021/2022 grant allocations

File No.: CP2022/07226

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Howick Local Board with information on applications in the Howick Quick Response round two 2021/2022; to enable a decision to fund, part fund or decline each application.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Howick Local Board adopted the Howick Local Board Community Grants Programme 2021/2022 on 17 May 2021 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants.

3.       This report presents applications received in the Howick Quick Response round two 2021/2022 (Attachment B).

4.       The local board has set a total community grants budget of $589,334.00 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

5.       For the 2021/2022 financial year, there are a total of three Local Grant rounds, two Multi-board and two Quick Response rounds.

6.       Thirty-three applications have been received for the 2021/2022 Howick Quick Response round two, requesting a total of $78,502.29.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a)      agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in Howick Quick Response round two 2021/2022 listed in the following table:

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

QR2207-203

Aotea Sport and Recreation Association Incorporated

Community

Towards video production, banner costs and venue hire for the 2022 Salsa Dance Open Day to promote the Howick 175 Anniversary

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-229

Asian Library Trust

Community

Towards costs for the project "Chinese Art & Culture to celebrate Howick 175th Anniversary"

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-231

Auckland Cambodian Youth and Recreation Trust

Community

Towards petrol vouchers for volunteers

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-221

Botany Chinese Association Incorporated

Community

Towards costs for the Mid-Autumn Festival and Christmas Parade

$2,990.00

Eligible

QR2207-212

Combined Probus Club of Botany Downs

Community

Towards the cost of three room hire

$1,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-213

Communicare CMA (Auckland) Incorporated

Community

Towards venue hire

$2,510.00

Eligible

QR2207-239

Highland Park Sewing Group

Community

Towards the purchase of sewing haberdashery, including buttons, cottons and needles

$500.00

Eligible

QR2207-209

Howick Art Group Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of advertising and venue hire of the Fencible Lounge

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-237

Howick Gymnastic Club Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the cost of six Samsung Galaxy tablets and cover cases

$2,973.84

Eligible

QR2207-246

Howick Hornets Rugby League Club Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the cost of training equipment, game day equipment as well as team apparel

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-205

Howick Little Theatre Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of two new computer systems including installation

$2,916.00

Eligible

QR2207-234

Howick Playcentre Incorporated

Community

Towards the cost of office supplies and backing supplies

$872.27

Eligible

QR2207-248

Howick Tourism Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of refreshing their website design

$2,990.00

Eligible

QR2207-223

Howick Tourism Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards operation costs for Howick Tourism including Xero subscription, accountant fees website fees and insurance

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-226

Howick Tourism Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of six months ongoing website and SEO maintenance

$1,500.00

Eligible

QR2207-217

Independent Living Charitable Trust

Community

Towards food including mooncake, gratuity, gratuity, administration and other miscellaneous items

$1,750.00

Eligible

QR2207-245

Indian Kiwi Positive Ageing Charitable Trust

Sport and recreation

Towards venue hire, catering and advertising

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-236

LifeKidz Trust

Community

Towards the cost of three Apple iPads and two projectors

$2,873.90

Eligible

QR2207-218

Manukau Orchestral Society Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards professional fees of player mentors

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-216

MECOSS

Community

Towards venue hire, advertising and administration costs

$2,997.50

Eligible

QR2207-210

Melanoma New Zealand

Community

Towards wages of an Education Nurse and an Administrator

$1,260.00

Eligible

QR2207-240

Mission Heights Junior College

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of a drum kit

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-225

Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust

Community

Toward mobility dog vet expenses

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-235

'NAAD' CHARITABLE TRUST (NZ)

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of photography, professional mentoring, sound and lighting hire for the project Saundarya

$3,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-241

New Zealand Overseas Chinese Culture & Arts Centre Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards venue hire and costume hire for the Coco-cola Christmas in the Park

$3,174.00

Eligible

QR2207-228

Pakuranga Athletic Club Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the cost of an air-fryer, lawn mower and rotary hoe

$2,590.00

Eligible

QR2207-208

Sunnyhills Netball Club Incorporated

Sport and recreation

Towards the cost of training netballs

$2,000.00

Eligible

QR2207-204

The Friends of Mangemangeroa Society Incorporated

Environment

Towards the cost of "Restoration and Maintaining of Native Species in the Mangemangeroa Reserves"

$2,374.00

Eligible

QR2207-230

The Helping Paws Charitable Trust

Environment

Towards the cost of kitten food for the "Howick Community Desexing Programme"

$1,500.00

Eligible

QR2207-224

The Howick & Districts Historical Society Incorporated

Arts and culture

Towards the cost of glass jars, fresh cream and wages

$2,986.00

Eligible

QR2207-211

The Uxbridge Community Projects Incorporated

Community

Towards the cost of blackout blinds

$1,744.78

Eligible

QR2207-207

Youthline Auckland Charitable Trust

Community

Towards telecommunications costs for texts and calls between July 2022 to March 202

$3,000.00

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$75,502.29

 

b)      agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in Howick Quick Response round two 2021/2022 listed in the following table:

 

Application ID

Organisation

Main focus

Requesting funding for

Amount requested

Eligibility

LG2207-

339

Young Life

New Zealand

Trust

Community

Towards

costs of the

Young Life

New Zealand

Trust 9 Week

Programme

$36,949.50

Eligible

Total

 

 

 

$36,949.50

 

 

Horopaki

Context https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/Context.aspx

7.       The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world class city.

8.       Auckland Council Community Grants Policy supports each local board to adopt a grants programme. The local board grants programme sets out:

·   local board priorities

·   higher priorities for funding

·   lower priorities for funding

·   exclusions

·   grant types, the number of grant rounds and when these will open and close

·   any additional accountability requirements.

9.       The Howick Local Board adopted the Howick Local Board Community Grants Programme 2021/2022 on 17 May 2021 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants.

10.     The community grant programmes have been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, radio and community networks

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11.     The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the Howick Local Board Plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

12.     As outlined in the Howick Grants Programme 2021/2022, staff have also assessed each application according to which applications to the needs of the community in support of the recovery from COVID-19.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/Climate-impact-statement.aspx

13.     The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by local residents in a locally relevant way.

14.     Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction; increasing access to single-occupancy transport options; home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation; local tree planting and streamside revegetation; and educating about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/CouncilGroupImpactsAndViews.aspx

15.     Based on the main focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice. The main focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment or heritage.

16.     The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17.     Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Howick Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications in accordance with its priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

18.     The local board is requested to note that section 48 of the Community Grants Policy states; “We will also provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants about why they have been declined, so they will know what they can do to increase their chances of success next time”.

19.     A summary of each application received through the Howick Quick Response round two, is provided (refer Attachment B)

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

20.     The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Unit has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

21.     Nine applicants applying to the Howick Quick Response round two have indicated that their project targets Māori or contribute to Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22.     The allocation of grants to community groups is within the adopted Long-term Plan 2021-2031 and local board agreements.

23.     The Howick Local Board adopted the Howick Local Board Community Grants Programme 2021/2022 on 17 May 2021 (Attachment A). The document sets application guidelines for contestable grants.

24.     The local board has set a total community grants budget of $589,334.00 for the 2021/2022 financial year.

25.     There will be a total of three Local Grants, two Multi-board and two Quick Response rounds in the 2021/2022 financial year.

26.     Fifty-five applications were received for the 2021/2022 Howick Local Grants round one, requesting a total of $644,647.92, and twelve applications for the 2021/2022 Multi-board Grant round one requesting a total of $516,841.44.

27.     Forty-three applications for the 2021/2022 Howick Local Grant round one, was granted a total of $293,560.86.

28.     Five 2021/2022 Howick Multi-board Grant round one applications was granted a total of $12,600.00. A total of $306,160.86 allocated.

29.     Twenty-eight applications were received for the 2021/2022 Howick Local Grant round two and a total of $115,404.39 was granted.

30.     Twenty-seven applications were received for the 2021/2022 Howick Quick Response round one, requesting a total of $69,903.03 and a total of $44,015.03 was granted.

31.     The balance available of the 2021/2022 Howick grants budget is $123,753.72, however an additional $74,923.95 was added to the total which now makes the remaining budget $198,677.67.

32.     Thirty-four applications were received for the 2021/2022 Howick Local Grants round three, requesting a total of $410,144.80 and fifteen applications for the 2021/2022 Multi-board Grants round two requesting $721,443.00 and a total of $163,735.34 was granted.

33.     The remaining balance available is a total of $34,942.32.

34.     Thirty-three applications have been received for the 2021/2022 Howick Quick Response round two, requesting a total of $78,502.29.

35.       Relevant staff from Auckland Council’s Finance Department have been fully involved in the development of all local board work programmes, including financial information in this report, and have not identified any financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations https://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/workingatcouncil/techandtools/infocouncil/Pages/Risks.aspx

36.     The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

37.     Staff recommend that due to current COVID19 crisis, if an applicant is unable to carry out the project in this financial year, then a clause is added to the recommendation, that the applicant can retain the funds to carry out the event in the next financial year or postpone the event date, to when alert levels have reduced, and the event can be conducted safely.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     Following the Howick Local Board allocation of funding for the Quick Response round two 2021/2022, Commercial and Finance staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Howick Community Grants Programme 2021/2022

977

b

Howick Quick Response round two - applications summary

981

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Arna Casey - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Pierre Fourie - Grants & Incentives Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

 

 


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Howick Local Board

20 June 2022

 

 

 

2021/2022 Howick Quick Response, Round Two

QR2207-203

Aotea Sport and Recreation Association Incorporated

Legal status:

Incorporated Society

Activity focus:

Community

Conflicts of interest:

None identified

Project: 2022 Salsa Dance Open Day - Howick 175 Anniversary

Location:

Ormiston Activity Centre

Summary:

Live band & NZ Salsa Dance Champion will be invited to lead the participators.
Everyone is welcomed to join our Salsa Dance Open day in Outdoor in Ormiston Activity Centre.
Everyone will enjoy the Latin music & dance to celebrate and promote HOWICK 175 anniversary this year.

Dates:

10/09/2022 - 10/09/2022

Rain dates:

 -

People reached:

100

% of participants from Local Board

100%

 

Community benefits

Identified community outcomes:

 

body movement to improve physic health
music can improve the lifestyle and mentor
Promote HOWICK 175 can deliver the heritage knowledge
A good opportunity to reunion community

Alignment with local board priorities:

 

Support local arts, culture, music and heritage activities and experiences

 

We have Salsa Dance programs on Sunday weekly in UXBRIDGE Arts & Culture Center. We plan to hold a Salsa Dance Open Day to attract more local community while promoting the HOWICK 175 Anniversary this year. Salsa Dance is Latin Culture Dance also it helps body movement.

 

Demographics

Māori outcomes:

No Māori outcomes identified

Accessible to people with disabilities

Yes - the venue can be accessible to disable people

Target ethnic groups:

All/everyone

Healthy environment approach:

Promote smoke-free messages, Include waste minimisation (zero waste) messages, Healthy options for food and drink, including water as the first choice, Encouraging active lifestyles including movement or fitness programmes

Smoke free during the whole event
No waste left after event
Healthy drink for participators
Body movement in Salsa Dance Event

 

Percentage of males targeted

Percentage of females targeted

All - not targeted male/female

%

%

100%

 

0-5 years

< 15 years

15-24 years

25-44 years

45-64 years

>65 years

All ages

%

%

%

%

%

%

100%

 

Financial information

Amount requested:

$3000.00

Requesting grant for:

Cost for hiring musical equipment
Cost for Salsa dance instructor
Cost for event video production cost
Cost for event promotion material
Cost for event sound system equipment hiring cost

If part funded, how would you make up the difference:

We need the funds so we can set up the event. if only part of projects get funded, we will change plan.

Cost of participation:

no

 

Total expenditure

Total income

Other grants approved

Applicant contribution

$3236.34

$0.00

$0.00

$500.00

 

Expenditure item

Amount

Amount requested from Local Board

Event Video Production Cost

$950.00

$950.00

Event Promotion Banner Cost

$920.00

$920.00

Event Sound System Hiring Cost

$989.00

$989.00

Venue Booking Cost

$77.34

$77.34

Two Salsa Dance Instructors cost 3 Hours

$300.00

$300.00

 

Total number of volunteers

Total number of volunteer hours

Amount

10

20

$423.00