Agenda of Waiheke Local Board - Wednesday, 27 July 2022

1 Welcome

Kua uru mai a hau kaha, a hau maia, a hau ora, a hau nui,

Ki runga, ki raro, ki roto, ki waho

Rire, rire hau…pai marire

Translation (non-literal) - Rama Ormsby

Let the winds bring us inspiration from beyond,

Invigorate us with determination and courage to achieve our aspirations for abundance and sustainability

Bring calm, bring all things good, bring peace… good peace.

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 Waiheke Local Board:

a) confirm the minutes of its ordinary meeting, held on Wednesday, 22 June 2022, as true and correct.

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

7.1 Petition from Waiheke Action for Ethical Technology

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of the report is to present a petition from Waiheke Action for Ethical Technology (WAET) calling on the board to declare Waiheke Island a 5G-Free community.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Waiheke Action for Ethical Technology organised a petition in 2021 calling for Waiheke Island to be declared a 5G-Free community. The prayer was as follows:

“We call on the Waiheke Local Board to exercise the Precautionary principle to declare Waiheke Island a 5G-Free community until such time when independent scientific research into the cumulative biological effects of wireless radiation on the health of our residents, visitors and the environment, proves that this technology is safe”.

3. The petition is signed by over 500 local persons. The petition is attached under confidential as it is not clear that signatories were aware personal details would be made public.

4. Presentation of the petition was held over during the COVID on-line board meetings, in order that it could be presented to members in person.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the petition from WAET to declare Waiheke Island a 5G-Free community.

b) thank Mr Michael Fleck for his presentation and attendance.

Attachments

a Letter to the board........................................................................................ 197

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 Waiheke 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.

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

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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Chair's Update - July 2022	13

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Auckland Transport Report - July 2022

File No.: CP2022/09750

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update to the Waiheke Local Board on transport related matters in their area.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

This report covers:

2. A general summary of operational Auckland Transport projects and activities of interest to the Waiheke Local Board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the Auckland Transport July 2022 update.

Horopaki

Context

3. Auckland Transport is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. We report monthly to local boards, as set out in our Local Board Engagement Plan. This reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within the governance of Auckland on behalf of their local communities.

4. This report updates the Waiheke Local Board on Auckland Transport (AT) projects and operations in the local board area.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

5. 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 AT’s work programme.

6. The current funding available to the local board in the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) is $400,000 per annum.

7. The local board allocated and approved the funding available for their current three-year term ($872,000) to fund the design and construction of a shared path and cycle lane between 1 Surfdale Road and Donald Bruce Road roundabout (WHK2022/95).

8. Auckland Transport is required to defer $323m of capital expenditure over the next three years, and consequently the local board’s current LBTCF allocation will be staged with $205,800 being allocated this financial year.

9. This level of funding will allow the shared path and cycle lane project to progress with the detailed design, consultation and tender to be completed during FY22/23 as planned and construction anticipated to be scheduled for the following FY23/24.

Community Safety Fund (CSF)

10. The CSF is a capital budget established by Auckland Transport for use by local boards to fund local road safety initiatives. The purpose of this fund is to allow elected members to address long-standing local road safety issues that are not regional priorities and are therefore not being addressed by the Auckland Transport programme.

11. This project is to provide a separated sealed shoulder from the Yacht Club to Shelly Beach Rd.

12. Design Update:

· The plan showing the proposed sealed shoulder over the topographical survey and the Mean High Water Spring line has been completed. It now provides the project team a better understanding of the extent of the encroachment into the coastal area. This is mainly confined to the area around the culvert and the section leading to the existing concrete path located in the domain.

· The design for the retaining structures (rock wall similar to the existing) is currently being progressed. This requires some on-site testing of the ground/coastal conditions. The design for a pedestrian fence around the culvert will also form part of this phase (it will be like the one on the opposite side of the road). The draft design will be reviewed by a Coastal Engineer.

· Preliminary discussions with Auckland Council have commenced regarding Land Use and Coastal Consent. One of the key parts of the Coastal consent is for an Ecologist report. The project team is looking to engage an Ecologist who is familiar with Waiheke’s coastal environment.

· The project team is meeting with the Auckland Council Arborist to finalise tree consent and Tree Owner Approval process.

· Local Board and Mana Whenua consultation will commence once a draft design and some of the consent documentation has been completed.

· Indicative timelines will be provided upon completion of the project package/programme.

Update on Auckland Transport operations:

13. The table below has a general summary of projects and activities of interest to the local board with their status. Please note that:

· All timings are indicative and are subject to change.

· The Waiheke Operations Manager will update the local board in the event of any amendments or changes to the summaries provided for below.

Activity	Update
Road Maintenance	Programmed works July works includes routine cyclic maintenance of signs, drains and potholes. Various Roadworks sites Grading – Cowes Bay Rd, Awaararoa Rd, Fisher Rd, Garratt Rd. Digouts – Te Toki Rd, Fisher Rd, Cowes Bay Rd.
Te Huruhi School pedestrian crossing	The proposal is for a new pedestrian crossing to be constructed outside the school. Project manager update: External consultation has been closed out. Draft detailed design has commenced and will be delivered in September. A road safety audit will then be completed on the draft detailed design.
Donald Bruce Road intersection upgrade	This project is for the construction of a new roundabout at the Donald Bruce Rd/Causeway Rd/Alison Rd intersection in Surfdale. Scope of the project includes raised Swedish speed tables, changes to the traffic islands to accommodate new raised zebra crossings, footpath upgrades, pedestrian crossing lighting, and new road markings and signage. 1. Works commenced on site 11 April. Project manager update: The project is planned to be completed before the end of July, as per the initial programme. The project is in the final stage of works with asphalting, line marking and tree trimming works remaining. Asphalting and line marking are planned (weather permitting) for the week commencing 18^th July.
102 Ostend Road.	Placemakers Corner Design works are being completed to improve safety at the Placemakers / Ostend Road intersection. Improvements include widening the vehicle entrance into the centre, and provision of new line marking to move vehicles travelling westbound away from the shoulder. The new edge line provides an improved amenity for cyclists traveling westbound up the hill. New “SLOW” road marking, and a VMS (driver feedback) sign is to be installed at the end of the straight on the approach to the intersection. The flush median in the proposal necessitates resolution, and whilst the “SLOW” road marking and VMS sign could be installed prior to this, the decision has been made to combine traffic management plans to save on overall cost. Construction is currently planned for mid-September with AT waiting on a Placemakers signed agreement, council consent, and confirmation of contract from the contractor.
Wharf works	Matiatia Wharf (main) Preparations are underway for the second stage of AT’s wharf renewal project at Matiatia. Site works are now planned for August 2022 – AT is currently waiting on a biosecurity requirement for an approved Authority to Work (ATW) from a specialised diving contractor. A dive team will be working to remove the invasive Mediterranean fan worm (Sabella spallanzanii) from existing pontoons before they can be removed and transported away from the Matiatia site. The new incoming infrastructure is almost identical to what is currently on site, except for a new smaller pontoon to enable the separation of the northern and southern berths. These components are all currently being fabricated off site The components will be barged in, and works will commence from a barge positioned on the southern berth approximately where the current ferries operate from. First up will be the removal of the existing infrastructure, placement of two piles and then attaching the pontoon and the gangways, hydraulic and fixed platform. The operating ferries relocate to the neighbouring wharf where local commercial and recreational operators berth currently. Site works were expected to be 6-8 weeks but with the piling requirement this is now anticipated to take 12 weeks.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14. 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.

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

16. The impact of the information in this report is confined to Auckland Transport and does not impact on other parts of the Council group. Any engagement with other parts of the Council group will be carried out on an individual project basis.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no local, sub-regional or regional impacts.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

18. 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

19. There are no financial implications of receiving this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

20. The proposed decision of receiving the report has no risks. Auckland Transport has risk management strategies in place for all their projects.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

21. Auckland Transport will provide another update report to the local board at a future business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Richard La Ville, Operations Manager Waiheke & Gulf Islands Airfields

Authorisers

John Strawbridge, Group Manager Parking Services & Compliance

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager – Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Landowner approval request - Healthy Waters, Wastewater upgrade in The Strand Accessway Reserve

File No.: CP2022/10118

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Waiheke Local Board for the landowner approval application from Healthy Waters to install wastewater infrastructure within The Strand Accessway Reserve, Waiheke Island.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The applicant, Healthy Waters, seeks landowner approval to install wastewater infrastructure within The Strand Accessway Reserve (commonly known as Jacobs Ladder) “the reserve” as part of the Onetangi toilet wastewater upgrade project.

3. The current treatment plant poses environmental risk because it is located on a beachfront location that is and will be subject to further coastal erosion. This proposal will upgrade wastewater infrastructure to comply with current wastewater standards.

4. The proposed wastewater system upgrade within The Strand Accessway will involve the installation of a wastewater treatment system, installation of two treated effluent disposal fields, associated landscaping, including planting of specimen trees, low native vegetation and dense native vegetation, reinstatement of walkways and other landscaping features within all project works areas.Healthy Waters have consulted with the Waiheke Local Board, Onetangi Residents Society, neighbouring landowners, and Mana Whenua regarding the project.

5. All works for the project including earthworks and construction within the reserve are estimated to take six weeks to complete.

6. The proposal is consistent with the Waiheke Local Board Plan, Waiheke Local Climate Action Plan and Auckland Plan that seek to respond to and build resilience to climate change and “ensure that Waiheke remains a water-sensitive community, with sufficient resiliency in terms of drinking water supply, and for stormwater and wastewater management systems”,

7. On completion of the works the wastewater infrastructure will be operated and maintained by Healthy Waters.

8. Staff recommend that the Waiheke Local Board approve the application.

9. If the Waiheke Local Board supports the recommendation, staff will compile a landowner approval letter with associated conditions, allowing the applicant to proceed with the proposal.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) approve the application from Healthy Waters to install wastewater infrastructure within The Strand Accessway Reserve, Waiheke Island

Horopaki

Context

Proposal

10. The applicant, Healthy Waters, has applied for landowner approval to install wastewater infrastructure within The Strand Accessway Reserve as part of the Onetangi toilet wastewater upgrade project.

11. The current treatment plant poses environmental risk because it is located on a beachfront location that is and will be subject to further coastal erosion. This proposal will upgrade wastewater infrastructure to comply with current wastewater standards. The proposed disposal fields will have less public impact and risk of tidal damage and discharge of treated wastewater to the coast.

Wastewater infrastructure

12. The applicant’s proposed wastewater system upgrade within The Strand Accessway is comprised of the following works:

· installation of a wastewater treatment system based on textile media filter with UV disinfection including tanks, media filter units and pumps.

· installation of a 90 metre pressure wastewater pipe (by thrusting method) to convey treated effluent to the proposed treated effluent disposal field; and

· installation of two treated effluent disposal fields:

disposal Field A will comprise of two deep trenches measuring 10m long x 0.3m wide and 1m deep).

disposal field B of 832m²whereby new dripper lines comprising of 18mm flexible pipe will be pinned to the ground with metal pins that will be placed beneath existing trees on site.

· associated landscaping, including planting of specimen trees, low native vegetation and dense native vegetation, reinstatement of walkways and other landscaping features within all project works areas. A landscaping plan has been drafted. The final landscaping design will be developed in consultation with Waiheke Local Board.

· rope and bollards and signage and minor retaining walls if deemed required onsite.

13. the wastewater assets will be owned and operated by Healthy Waters.

14. The design of the proposed wastewater infrastructure is shown in the application plans – refer Attachment A.

Earthworks & Construction methodology

15. Horizontal directional drilling will be used to install a new pipe from the treatment plant to the disposal field.

16. Earthworks and excavation at the bottom of the reserve will take approximately four weeks. The works at the top where dripper lines will be placed on the disposal field will take approximately 1-2 weeks followed by planting. The treatment plant and the disposal field will be fenced off from public. Landscaping is proposed around the treatment plant once installed, a draft landscape plan has been prepared.

17. Healthy Waters have prepared a Construction Management Plan to ensure public safety and minimise the temporary construction effects during the works. A finalised version will be presented by their contractors to the satisfaction of the facilities manager, prior to commencement of works.

Construction timeframes

18. Earthworks and construction within the reserve would be undertaken over a period of 6 weeks.

19. The hours for construction work will be 7.30-6pm as per the noise and vibration limit guidelines.

Strategic and legislative alignment

The proposal is consistent with the following documents:

Waiheke Local Board Plan 2020

20. The proposal aligns with Outcome 1: “Sustainable development and liveable paces” that seeks to “ensure that Waiheke remains a water-sensitive community, with sufficient resiliency in terms of drinking water supply, and for stormwater and wastewater management systems”.

21. This is because the proposal will upgrade wastewater infrastructure that currently poses environmental risk to comply with current wastewater standards.

Auckland Plan 2050 and Waiheke Local Climate Action Plan

22. The proposal aligns with these plans that seek to respond to and build resilience to climate change. In particular, the proposed treatment plant will have less public impact and risk of tidal damage and discharge of treated wastewater to the coast.

Wastewater upgrade

23. Healthy Waters consider that the existing wastewater treatment plant for the Onetangi beach public toilets poses an environmental risk because it is located on a beach front that is subject to coastal erosion. The existing plant does not meet current standards and requires a full upgrade.

24. The proposed wastewater infrastructure within The Strand Accessway forms part of a wider project for the upgrade the existing wastewater system for the Onetangi Beach public toilet for which resource consent is currently in progress.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Specialist input

25. The following council specialists have reviewed and support the proposal subject to the proposed conditions (detailed below) being implemented:

· Geotechnical Specialist

· Development Engineer

· Parks Planning Specialist

· Parks & Places Specialist

· Community Park Ranger

· Operations Manager

· Facilities Manager

26. Council’s Development Engineer recommended that a detailed erosion and sedimentation control plan be provided.

27. Council’s Parks & Places Specialist has reiterated the need to engage with the local community and to keep the residents and business apprised of the development works on a regular basis. Healthy Waters have been made aware of this feedback and have confirmed that further leaflet drops will be made to residents of The Strand by their contractors to provide them with information closer to the time of construction.

28. The Operations Manager and Facilities Manager support the proposal subject to effective construction management being undertaken during the works.

29. Accordingly, if the landowner approval application is approved, suitable conditions will be included in the approval letter to mitigate the potential effects identified by the above specialists.

Urban Forest Specialist

30. Council’s Urban Forest Specialist provided the following feedback in relation to the potential impact of the proposal on existing coastal trees:

It's impossible to know, with any certainty, the impact on the trees. However, going from dry and often very dry soil conditions to a constantly moist soil environment will have a negative impact, I believe. Pathogens such as Phytophthora thrive in moist soil conditions, making short work of stressed trees. There is a very weedy area, seaward of the treed area, that should be considered for the field.

31. The above feedback from the Urban was raised with Healthy Waters who responded as follows:

The option of using the land closer to the cliffside was considered when selecting areas for the land application area. They key constraints with using this area are:

· This area has limited topsoil and exposed rocky outcrops in some locations. Topsoil is essential for the uptake of nutrients and for absorbing the treated effluent into the ground.

· The slope is excessively steep (>36degree and up to 52 degrees in some areas), which is beyond what is acceptable for land application fields and presents the following issues:

· Treated effluent will tend to flow down the cliffside before being absorbed into the ground.

· H&S risks with installing the drip lines on such a steep slope.

· Installation of the dripper lines will require significant vegetation clearance on the cliff for access.

· Maintenance and inspections of the lines is difficult and unsafe.

· Significant anchoring of the dripper lines into the rock would be required to prevent movement and dislodgement.

From discussions with the landowner next door to the reserve they advised that the area that we are proposing to install the land application field does get fairly wet during winter, hence the trees are already being exposed to some moisture. Furthermore, a conservative loading rate of 3mm/day has been used and understory planting will also help to absorb excess moisture. The treated effluent will also pass through a UV which will kill all the pathogens in the effluent. There are limited alternative options available.

32. Accordingly, it is considered that the applicant has considered all available options on site for the disposal field and given the constraints of topography and soil conditions the proposed location is the most feasible option. In addition, they will adopt appropriate methodologies, including the use of a conservative loading rate for the discharge, understory planting to absorb excess moisture and use of UV treatment to kill pathogens in the effluent to minimise any potential impacts to the trees.

Options considered

33. A detailed options assessment was completed by Morphum Environmental Limited in September 2020 to determine the preferred new treatment plant location. Ten disposal field options were assessed and The Strand Accessway Reserve (Jacobs Ladder) was identified as the preferred location.

34. The reasons why these options were not considered viable are summarised below:

Do nothing

35. The current treatment plant poses environmental risk because it is located on a beachfront location that is and will be subject to further coastal erosion. The existing plant does not meet current standards and requires a full upgrade.

Option B – Tertiary Treatment and disposal to sand filter at Onetangi Beach

36. This option would require further detailed analysis of tidal erosion and installation of erosion protection resulting in increased cost due to erosion potential. In addition, tertiary level treatment would be required due to proximity to the coast. This option would be located in a constrained place that may require part of the treatment system to be located under carparks which would make access difficult for future maintenance. In addition, it is also in a busier and more highly utilised public area that is close to the beach, playground and public toilets. Access to the disposal field could be discouraged with landscaping and fencing but this would likely detract from the open nature of the beachfront.

Disposal Field at Third Reserve

37. This option would reduce the size of the flood plain significantly. It would likely result in destruction and reduction in the local ecosystem. It would require major groundworks to raise the disposal area out of the floodplain. In addition, a high level of treatment and further modelling would be required to assess the effects on the floodplain to ensure it does not cause downstream/ upstream flooding.

Disposal Field at Pohutukawa Reserve

38. This option would not meet the GD06 On-site Wastewater Management Guide from the Auckland Design Manual for maximum slopes (30%) for the dripper lines. This reserve is further away from the toilet block which increase the length of infrastructure required. The disposal fields would be in road reserve (Waiheke Road) meaning further consultation would be required to utilise this area. It is also likely that vegetation clearance would be required to install the dripper lines.

Disposal Field at Tin Boat Reserve

39. This option would require a large disposal field on a 23% slope. This reserve is also heavily utilised containing walkways which would need careful consideration regarding the placement of disposal fields.

Disposal Field and pump at Victoria Reserve

40. This reserve is very steep. It would also not meet GD06 On-site Wastewater Management Guide from the Auckland Design Manual for maximum slopes (30%) for the dripper lines. This reserve is also located further from the public toilets and the pumps required to pump the disposal may need to be larger than other sites. It is also close to a 100-year floodplain.

Disposal Field at Homersham Reserve

41. This reserve has limited space for a disposal field of a sufficient size and the disposal field would have to be installed sections. The reserve and surrounding area is also heavily used by the public. Sub surface lines would be required. In addition, a significant amount of re- landscaping would be required following installation.

Install a vault tank at Onetangi Public Toilets

42. This option would require the construction of a large vault tank to reduce pump out frequencies. It would also have the highest operational, monitoring and maintenance costs.

Join with existing wastewater system in the area

43. For this option there would be less control over effluent quality. The type of wastewater may change depending on the system joined. Feasibility is likely to be limited by current treatment capabilities in place and areas available for disposal.

Discharge treated effluent to wetland at Third Reserve

44. This option would not meet current wastewater guidelines (TP58) as no disposal system would be installed. It may also be contrary to the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater. Therefore, it would be difficult or unlikely to obtain a resource consent. There would also be additional costs associated with detailed investigation of the wetland to determine design requirements. If resource consent were obtained there would likely be more stringent controls on effluent quality testing and additional monitoring and maintenance costs to assess the on-going impacts of the discharge to the wetland.

Preferred option

45. The Strand Accessway Reserve option was chosen because it requires a short distance for the wastewater to be pumped. It allows the beachfront area that is currently occupied by the old treatment plant to be given back to the community and allows for improvements to be made to The Strand Accessway reserve walkway that will ensure public connectivity and amenity in the area.

46. Furthermore, the applicant considers that installing the treatment plant and land application at The Strand Accessway to be the most feasible option because:

· it is the closest council owned reserve,

· it will not change the land use of any parcels of land,

· the reserve has no flood potentials and is suitable for treated wastewater irrigation.

47. If the Waiheke Local Board approve the application and the preferred option, the applicant will be granted landowner approval to install wastewater infrastructure with The Strand Accessway.

48. If the local board decline the application, the applicant will not be able to undertake the proposed works and the alternative options will need to be explored further. The applicant has advised that these options pose greater environmental risk and/or additional construction and whole of life costs that are not acceptable to Healthy Waters.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

49. The project will reduce the likely risks and consequences from coastal erosion associated with the existing treatment system. The proposed disposal fields are set back from the coast which will have less public impact and risk of tidal damage and discharge of treated wastewater to the coast. Therefore, the proposal will assist the community to build resilience to climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

50. The application and its effects have been assessed by the relevant technical experts on behalf of both the applicant and the council. These areas of expertise include development engineering, geotechnical, arboriculture, parks strategy and operational maintenance.

51. It is considered that no other council groups affected by the proposal beyond those consulted with.

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

Local impacts and local board views

52. The applicant has held discussions with the Waiheke Local Board since late 2021 regarding the proposal and they presented the proposal to a local board workshop on 2 February 2022. The applicant has indicated that initial feedback from the Waiheke Local Board has been supportive.

53. Healthy Waters have indicated in their application that they have since undertaken recommended consultation with the Onetangi Residents Society as recommended by the Waiheke Local Board.

54. Healthy Waters have consulted with neighbouring landowners at 470 Seaview Road and 57 The Strand.

55. The treatment and land application system are located a minimum of 3 metres from all habitable dwellings and the existing footpath within Jacob’s Ladder Reserve. The land application system will also be setback by a minimum of 1.5 metres from the site boundary.

56. The disposal areas will be fenced off using rope and bollards.

57. Between 4-6 signs will be placed around the disposal field. The signs will be the standard Auckland Council treated effluent signage.

58. Healthy Waters have confirmed that further leaflet drops will be made to residents along The Strand to provide residents with information closer to the time of construction.

59. The treatment plant and disposal fields are not expected to produce noticeable odour. Active carbon filters will be installed on all vents to the treatment plant to remove any smell. This plant will also be included in the maintenance and monitoring schedules for Citycare who have an existing contract with Auckland Council to maintain wastewater treatment plants on the island.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

60. Healthy Waters engage with Mana Whenua on all projects that require resource consent. Mana Whenua were contacted regarding this project in April 2021. Furthermore, Healthy Waters contacted Mana Whenua groups in January 2022 to seek any interest or feedback prior to making the resource consent application and to ensure awareness of their opportunity request engagement on the project at any stage in this process. Healthy Waters have confirmed that no feedback or requests have been made by Mana Whenua to request engagement.

61. Upgrading the wastewater treatment system is consistent with recognising the mauri of water and iwi cultural values.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

62. The costs associated with the construction of the wastewater infrastructure and the reinstatement of The Strand Accessway following completion of the works will be the responsibility of the Healthy Waters.

63. The ownership and ongoing maintenance of the wastewater infrastructure will lie with Healthy Waters.

64. There will be no financial cost to the local board for the proposal.

65. In the longer term there are likely to be financial benefits from de-commissioning the existing treatment plant that presently poses environmental and thus a financial risk.

66. Council’s financial advisor has been consulted and is in agreement with this advice.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

67. There are no significant risks to council associated with the proposal and associated recommendation. The application and its effects have been assessed by a number of technical experts on behalf of both the applicant and the council, and strategically the proposal meets council’s direction.

68. The applicant has also applied for a resource consent (BUN60396097, LUC60396099 and DIS60396098) whereby potential adverse effects of the proposal will be assessed further under the Auckland Unitary Plan (operative in part) and the National Environmental Standards to ensure they are acceptable.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

69. If the local board approves the proposal, the applicant will receive landowner approval for the proposed wastewater installation works. A landowner approval letter will be issued to the applicant with conditions that will mitigate any potential adverse effects on the park.

70. If the local board declines the application, the proposal will not be able to proceed and land owner approval will not be granted. The applicant will then have to further consider alternative options that pose greater risk to the environment, are significantly more expensive and currently not acceptable to Healthy Waters.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a	Design drawings of proposed wastewater infrastructure	33
b ⇩	Design report	41
c ⇩	Draft landscape plan	91

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Gail Lorier-May - Land Use Advisor – Property and Commercial Business

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe – General Manager – Community Facilities

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager – Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan - appointment of independent commissioners

File No.: CP2022/10300

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To appoint independent commissioners to the hearings panel for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report recommends that the Waiheke Local Board appoint two independent commissioners for the hearing of submissions for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan ( draft plan), one as a chair of the hearings panel and the other as an alternative in case the chair becomes unavailable.

3. The draft plan is a statutory document prepared under the Reserves Act 1977 and includes most local parks held under the Local Government Act 2002 and Reserves Act 1977 on Waiheke Island except for a small number of reserves identified as out of scope, including Rangihoua Reserve and Onetangi Sports Park.

4. The draft plan, once adopted, will provide a policy framework to manage use, protection and development for local parks on Waiheke.

5. At its October 2020 (WHK/2020/167) meeting the local board appointed a hearings panel for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan consisting of an independent commissioner as chair and all local board members.

6. Staff recommended that the local board delegate to the local board chair and deputy chair the power to approve the selection of an independent commissioner.

7. The local board chose not to make this delegation as their preference was for all local board members to approve the selection of an independent commissioner.

8. The local board approved the notification of the draft plan at its October 2021 meeting (WHK/2021/121). The draft plan was notified on the 24^th of January 200 and submissions on the draft plan were received until 16 May 2022. Approximately 40 submissions were received and have asked to be heard.

9. It is anticipated that a hearing will be held in November or December 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) appoint Rebecca Skidmore as independent commissioner to chair the hearings panel for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan

b) appoint Robert Scott as an alternative independent commissioner to chair the hearing panel for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan should Rebecca Skidmore become unavailable

c) delegate to the local board chairperson the power to make replacement appointments should any panel member appointed under recommendations a) and b) above be unavailable

d) note that the decision to approve the final Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan will remain with the local board.

Horopaki

Context

10. The local board resolved on 28 October 2020 (WHK/2020/167) to appoint a hearings panel for the draft Waiheke Local Parks Management Plan (draft plan) consisting of an independent commissioner as chair and all local board members to:

· hear objections and submissions from submitters on the draft plan

· make recommendations to the local board about

o amendments to the draft plan following the hearings process, and

o the extent to which objections and submissions are allowed or accepted or disallowed or not accepted.

11. Staff recommended that the local board delegate to the local board chair and deputy chair the power to approve the selection of an independent commissioner.

12. The local board chose not to make this delegation as their preference was for all local board members to approve the selection of an independent commissioner.

13. This report enables the full local board to consider and decide on the selection.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The local board needs to select two independent commissioners for the hearings panel, one as chair and the other as an alternative in case the chair becomes unavailable.

15. The draft plan is a statutory document prepared under the Reserves Act 1977 (RA) and staff recommend that independent commissioners with experience in RA matters be appointed.

16. An important role of the independent commissioner is to write the recommendation report to the local board on the hearings panel’s recommendations for amendments to the draft plan.

17. To assist the board in making appointments, staff have identified preferred candidates within the list of independent commissioners provided as Attachment A.

18. Staff recommend that Rebecca Skidmore is appointed as chair and Robert Scott is appointed as an alternative, with the local board chair delegated the power to make replacement appointments should the chair appointed no longer be available.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. The decisions in this report are administrative and are not directly impacted by the effects of climate change or have direct impacts on greenhouse gas emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

20. The Hearings Team provided specialist advice for this report and will support the hearings process for the draft plan.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. The options for appointing a hearings panel, including an independent commissioner, were considered by the local board at their business meeting on 28 October 2020.

22. The local board resolved (WHK/2020/167) to appoint a hearings panel consisting of all local board members and an independent commissioner as chair.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

24. Mana whenua and mataawaka have made submissions on the draft plan and requested the opportunity to speak to their submissions at a hearing.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. The costs for the independent commissioner on the hearing panel is met from existing Hearings Team operational budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. The following table outlines relevant risks and mitigations.

Risk

Mitigation

Independent commissioner is not available

Appoint two independent commissioners, one as chair and the other as an alternative chair

Delegate power to the local board chair to appoint replacements if required

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. It is anticipated that a hearing will be held following the local government elections in November or December 2022.

28. Staff will be in contact with the local board closer to the time to make arrangements for the hearing.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Independent Commissioners List	109

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shyrel Burt - Service and Asset Planning Specialist

Authorisers

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

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager – Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Independent hearings commissioner profiles

Preferred commissioners

David Hill

David Hill is a fulltime independent hearings commissioner engaged by 23 city, district, regional and national authorities throughout NZ. He has held an RMA chairing endorsement since 2009 and has been an appointed hearings and duty commissioner for Auckland Council since its inception in 2010.

Mr Hill has over 35 years’ experience in the areas of: public policy and legislation development; environmental and resource management assessment and decision making; Reserves Act; institutional reform and management both in New Zealand and overseas.

Mr Hill has sat on boards of inquiry among other appointments and was a member of the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel.

Mr Hill’s experience in the Reserves Act 1977 has been as a consultant, an advisor and a Commissioner, and was Chair of the Auckland Conservation Board for 7 years. The Board considered a wide range of reserves and parks matters, including management plans, conservation strategy, concession applications, and national policy.

Rebecca Skidmore

Rebecca Skidmore is a landscape architect and urban designer. She has been a certified commissioner since 2007 and was an appointed hearings commissioner for Auckland Council 2010 – 2017 and re-joined the commissioner pool in 2021.

Ms Skidmore has over 30 years’ experience in the areas of: landscape assessment and planning; visual assessment; urban planning; heritage planning; statutory planning and policy preparation.

Ms Skidmore has experience in the preparation of conservation plans and guidelines to ensure that the cultural and historic values of landscapes and sites are recognised and protected.

Ms Skidmore’s company, RA Skidmore Urban Design Ltd. is a founding signatory to the Urban Design Protocol.

Other commissioners

Robert Scott	Robert Scott is a Planner. Mr Scott has over 25 years’ experience in the areas of: urban planning; coastal and riparian policy; subdivision and development; conservation planning; rural planning; coastal management, reserve act. Mr Scott has experience administering the Reserves Act 1977 both as a practitioner and as a commissioner. Mr Scott was a planner for the Department of Conservation where he was required to consider the conservation implications of various activities on reserve land. In 2017, Mr Scott was a hearing panel member on the Rosedale Park and other reserves hearing which came about as a consequence of current leasing arrangements being impacted by the Northern Corridor Improvements (motorway) project. Mr Scott has a working knowledge of the Resource Management Act 1991, Reserves Act 1977, Conservation Act 1987 and the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014.
William (Bill) Smith, JP	Bill Smith is a former elected member (Rodney District Council). Mr Smith has experience in the areas of: governance; planning; district plan development; interpreting legislation. Mr Smith has extensive experience and knowledge of the Reserves Act 1977. Mr Smith has undertaken reviews of numerous Reserve Management Plans both from a political and community perspective and he has served on a number of joint Community Reserve Management Plan Committees to implement plans. Mr Smith is a hearing commissioner for a number of councils around New Zealand as well as a lay member of the New Zealand Lawyers & Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal.
Les Simmons	Mr Simmons has over 40 years’ experience in the areas of: planning and resource management. Mr Simmons has been a full time hearings commissioner for 15 years. Mr Simmons has carried out consultancy work for legacy council’s under the Reserves Act 1977. His experience includes an understanding of the various types of reserve classifications and the reserve management plan process including the hearing process. Mr Simmons was involved in the detailed planning of the Harry James/Taupaki Reserve. Mr Simmons was a member of the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel.
Helen Mellsop	Helen Mellsop is a Landscape Architect. Ms Mellsop has over 19 years’ experience in the areas of: landscape architecture; landscape and visual assessments; reserve management planning. Ms Mellsop has presented landscape evidence at numerous district or city council consent hearings, both on behalf of applicants or submitters and on behalf of councils as well as appearing frequently at Environment Court appeals on behalf of council. Ms Mellsop is a member of the NZ Institute of Landscape Architects.
Sarah Shaw	Sarah Shaw is a lawyer and planner who resides in Whangarei. Ms Shaw has over 20 years’ experience in the areas of: resource management law; resource consenting; plan and policy development; reserve management plans. Ms Shaw has practiced as both a planner and an lawyer and is the co-chair of the RMLA Northland Branch.
Vanessa Hamm	Vanessa Hamm is a lawyer who resides in Tauranga. Ms Hamm has over 20 years’ experience in the areas of: resource management; environmental law; planning law; Reserves Act. Ms Hamm was recently awarded a Master of Laws with First Class Honours in Environmental Law from the University of Auckland, is a member of the Resource Management Law Association and a member of the NZLS Law Reform – Environmental Law Committee.

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

2021-22 Q3 Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan update and 2022-23 Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan adoption

File No.: CP2022/08760

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Waiheke Local Board with an update on Council-Controlled Organisation work programme items in its area.

For the Waiheke Local Board to adopt its Joint CCO (Council-Controlled Organisation) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plans have been agreed between local boards and CCO staff during workshops held in April and May, and through subsequent follow up conversations.

4. The substantive document, once adopted, will be in place for two years. The attachments to the plan will be amended throughout the year to ensure the plan is up to date and fit for purpose.

5. Updates will be provided to local boards each quarter to show both changes to the plan itself, and to provide updates on the work programme items included in the attachments to the plan.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) receive the third quarter update on Council-Controlled Organisation work programme items in its area.

b) adopt the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023 as agreed between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Eke Panuku Development Auckland, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and Watercare

c) note that the attachments to the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023 will be updated as needed, with changes reported to the local board each quarter

d) authorise the chair of the local board to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, alongside representatives from the four CCOs.

Horopaki

Context

6. In 2020, the CCO Review report recommended the introduction of a joint CCO local board engagement plan for each local board.

7. In mid-2021, the first Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plans were agreed and adopted.

8. Since then, staff have worked to develop and refine both the process to agree the documents, and the format of the documents themselves.

9. During April and May 2022, workshops were held between each local board and representatives from the four substantive CCOs.

10. During May, staff have worked to ensure that the final document is representative of the discussions held at workshops, and that any outstanding questions have been resolved.

11. The substantive part of the engagement plan is designed to be in place for two years. In subsequent years, this document is likely to remain in use for three years, following the completion of the Local Board Plan.

12. The attachments to the plan include information that is likely to require updating such as staff contacts and project updates and will be amended throughout the year to ensure the plan is up to date and fit for purpose.

13. Quarterly updates will be provided to each local board to show both changes to the plan itself, and updates on the work programme items included in the attachments to the plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. Workshops between local boards and CCO staff have provided local boards with the opportunity to share their views on CCO delivery and engagement in their area. Each workshop included an outline of each CCO’s work programme within the local board area, and local boards have provided their views on the degree of engagement they expect for each project or programme.

15. The Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023 addresses key elements of recommendations made by the CCO Review, including:

· documenting key contacts, including senior CCO representatives of the organisation well placed to quickly respond to and resolve local concerns

· giving local boards the opportunity to highlight projects likely to be most significant to them as governors, contributing to a “no surprises” environment

· ensuring the communication of clear, up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area.

16. While it is still early days in terms of local board members and staff adjusting to the new way of working together, initial feedback has been positive.

17. Work programme items that will be confirmed with the formal adoption of 2022-23 budgets will be included as they become available.

Updates to the engagement plan

18. Staff have updated the attachments to the engagement plan where there have been:

· new board members

· changes to local board members delegations or portfolios

· staff changes within Local Board Services or CCOs.

19. These changes are reflected in Attachment A – Waiheke Local Board Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2022-2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The adoption of the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-23 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have a direct impact on climate, however many of the projects it refers to will.

21. Each CCO must work within Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework and information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

50. Adopting the updated Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023 is likely to have a positive impact on other parts of the council as well as between the respective CCOs within each local board area.

51. These plans will be shared with the integration teams that implement local board work programmes and will give council staff greater ongoing visibility of CCO work programmes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

52. Local board engagement plans enable local boards to signal to CCOs those projects that are of greatest interest to the local board, and to ensure that engagement between the local board and the four CCOs is focussed on those priority areas.

53. The engagement plans also give local boards the opportunity to communicate to CCOs which projects they expect to be of most interest to their communities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. Updating and adopting the Joint CCO Engagement Plan 2022-2023 may have a positive impact on local engagement with mana whenua and mataawaka.

55. While both CCOs and local boards have engagement programmes with Māori, the engagement plan will allow a more cohesive and coordinated approach to engagement, with more advance planning of how different parts of the community will be involved.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56. The adoption of the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.

57. Any financial implications or opportunities will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. Changes will be made within the attachments of the Joint CCO Engagement Plan to ensure that information is kept up to date. The substantive document will not change until after the development of the next Local Board Plan. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the document states clearly that it is subject to change, and will be re-published on the local board agenda quarterly, to ensure public transparency.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59. The local board will receive Quarter Four updates in September 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Waiheke Local Board Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2023	117

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Janine Geddes - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager - Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager – Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council's submission on the Water Services Entities Bill

File No.: CP2022/10448

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To note the feedback provided from the Waiheke Local Board to inform and be included in Auckland Council’s submission to central government on the Water Services Entities Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At the 22 April 2020 business meeting the Waiheke Local Board resolved to delegate to the Chair to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions.

Local board feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions

Resolution number WHK/2020/54

MOVED by Member R Tucker, seconded by Deputy Chairperson B Upchurch:

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) delegate authority to the chair to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils.

b) note that the local board can continue to use its urgent decision process to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils, if the chair chooses not to exercise the delegation sought in recommendation (a).

c) note that this delegation will only be exercised where the timeframes do not allow for local board input to be considered and approved at a local board meeting.

d) note all local input approved and submitted for inclusion in an Auckland Council submission is to be included on the next local board meeting agenda for the public record.

CARRIED

3. The Water Services Entities Bill was introduced to Parliament on 2 June and referred to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on 9 June. Submissions closed 22 July.

4. The introduction of the Bill followed the release of the exposure draft in December 2021 to support the work of the Representation, Governance and Accountability Working Group. The Government has responded to recommendations of this Working Group and this response is reflected in the Bill introduced.

5. The Bill establishes the Northern Water Services Entity that includes Auckland Council, Far North District Council, Kaipara District Council, and Whangārei District Council.

6. There are a number of changes in the final Bill which include provisions for:

i. the allocation of population-based shares to territorial authority owners – however these do not come with decision-making rights and cannot be sold so do not provide the typical ownership that shareholding normally brings

ii. a divestment proposal requiring unanimous support from territorial authority owners to proceed to a public poll

iii. the Water Services Entity (WSE) to fund the work of the Regional Representatives Group (RRG), regional advisory panels, territorial authority owners and mana whenua

iv. the introduction of regional advisory panels to the RRG

v. a single constitution that applies to the RRG, the regional advisory panels and the WSE board

vi. the Statement of Strategic and Performance Expectations to include how the WSE will give effect to Te Mana o Te Wai

vii. the strategic elements of the Statement of Intent to be approved by the RRG

viii. an individual iwi or hapū or group of iwi or hapū providing Te Mana o Te Wai statements that may relate to one or more freshwater bodies

ix. the Minister to consult with the RRG and Taumata Arowai in the preparation of a Government policy statement

x. each local government organisation to provide the Department of Internal Affairs with information about intended decisions during transition that relate to the provision of water services

xi. review of governance and accountability arrangements after five years and legislation after 10 years.

7. Delegation and approval was sought and given at the Governing Body meeting on 23 June 2022 (item 9).

8. Strategic Advice staff lead the development of the council’s submission which was due to Government by 22 July 2022.

9. Local board input into that submission was sought and provided as outlined in attachments A and B.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) note the board’s input in Attachment A which approved and submitted under delegation for inclusion in an Auckland Council submission on the proposed Water Services Entities Bill.

b) note the board’s earlier related feedback Attachment B (endorsed 22 September 2021) on the Three Waters Reform

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment A - 20220708_Water Services Entities Bill - Waiheke Local Board feedback under delegation_V1.0	151
b ⇩	Attachment B - Copy of Waiheke Local Board's prior feedback endorsed on 22 September 2021 on Three Waters Reform	155

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dileeka Senewiratne - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason – General Manager - Local Board Services

Glenn Boyd - Local Area Manager – Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke Local Boards

Waiheke Local Board

27 July 2022

Local board feedback on the strategic direction of Auckland's Future Development Strategy

File No.: CP2022/09748

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the strategic approach to the Future Development Strategy (FDS).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It should assist with the integration of land use and infrastructure planning and funding decisions and set out how Tāmaki Makaurau will:

· achieve outcomes across the four well-beings

· achieve a well-functioning urban environment

· provide sufficient development capacity to meet housing and business land demand over the short, medium, and long-term

· coordinate critical development infrastructure and additional infrastructure required and explain how this integrates planning decisions with infrastructure and funding decisions.

3. The updated FDS will replace the existing Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050 and will incorporate the new requirements of the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS UD). New information on environmental and social changes such as responses to climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic will also be included.

4. During the early development of the FDS, topics and issues will be researched at a regional scale. As the FDS work develops and becomes more detailed, local board specific material will be available and workshopped with local boards. This is planned for Quarter1 and Quarter 2 2023.

5. Over the first half of 2022 seven ‘big issues’ facing Auckland were discussed at series of Planning Committee workshops. These issues were: hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development; climate change, emissions reduction and urban form; inundation and natural hazards; intensification – dispersed or focused; infrastructure; greenfields and future urban areas; and business and employment.

6. Local board feedback is sought on this direction, prior to seeking endorsement from the Planning Committee in August and/or September 2022. If endorsed, the staff will use the strategic direction as a basis for developing the draft FDS over the second half of 2022.

7. An updated FDS is needed in time to inform the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 (LTP). To provide strategic direction that will usefully feed into the LTP process the FDS will need to be completed by mid-2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Waiheke Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the strategic direction for the Future Development Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

What is the Future Development Strategy?

8. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It sets out how, where and when Tāmaki Makaurau is expected to grow over the next 30 years and outlines where and when investment in planning and infrastructure will be made. The updated FDS will replace the existing Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan 2050. It sets out how Tāmaki Makaurau will:

· achieve outcomes across the four well-beings

· achieve a well-functioning urban environment

· provide sufficient development capacity to meet housing and business land demand over the short, medium, and long-term

· coordinate critical development infrastructure and additional infrastructure required and explain how this integrates planning decisions with infrastructure and funding decisions.

9. The FDS will show how the direction and outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050 will be achieved spatially and it will incorporate a clear statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development.

10. It will identify the existing and future location, timing and sequencing of growth and infrastructure provision. It will also identify constraints on development.

11. Sequencing of development areas within the existing urban areas and future urban areas will be assessed as part of this update.

Why is it being updated now?

12. There have been many changes since the Development Strategy was adopted as part of the Auckland Plan 2050, nearly four years ago, including central government initiatives under the Urban Growth Agenda and new national policy statements such as the NPS UD. In addition, council has led strategy and policy work focused on environmental and social challenges, including responses to climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. The growth model is also being reviewed and updated to support the spatial evidence for the FDS.

13. This changing context, but specifically the requirements of the NPS UD, means Tāmaki Makaurau’s long-term spatial plan requires updating. The update will consider the detailed NPS UD changes to the Auckland Unitary Plan, such as intensification around train and bus rapid transit stops, however the purpose is different as it has a long-term (30 year) strategic focus.

14. At its 30 November 2021 meeting, the Planning Committee approved the development of an update to the FDS and endorsed the high-level work programme (committee resolution PLA/2021/137).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Strategic direction on the ‘big issues’

15. Over the first half of 2022 seven ‘big issues’ facing Auckland were discussed at series of Planning Committee workshops. The Future Development Strategy will need to address these issues (set out below).

16. Local board feedback is sought on this direction, prior to seeking endorsement from the Planning Committee in August and/or September 2022. If endorsed, the staff will use the strategic direction as a basis for developing the draft FDS over the second half of 2022.

Hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development

17. The NPS UD directs that the FDS is informed by ‘Māori, and in particular tangata whenua, values and aspirations for urban development’. These values could provide a strong framework for taking a longer term, more sustainable approach to development in Auckland.

18. Strategic direction:

· hapū and iwi values and aspirations are a key aspect to the FDS and should be an overarching theme throughout, rather than a separate section or workstream

· a thorough engagement approach is critical to understanding directly from hapū and iwi what their values and aspirations for urban development are

· mataawaka and relevant Māori organisations should be included in the engagement.

Climate change, emissions reduction and urban form

19. An increased focus on climate change is a key aspect of updating the FDS. The council has committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Auckland needs to prepare for the impacts of climate change and plan for a potential 3.5 degree temperature increase. Urban form plays a major role in our ability to reduce emissions, as well as our exposure to natural hazards (see below).

20. Strategic direction:

· climate change related outcomes are non-negotiable, and every decision needs to consider climate change implications

· achieving climate change related outcomes should be an overarching theme throughout the FDS.

Inundation and natural hazards

21. There are areas of Auckland that are, and with the impacts of climate change (discussed above), increasingly will be, exposed to natural hazards such as inundation, flooding and erosion.

22. Strategic direction:

· take a strong approach to development in hazardous areas and provide clear public messages about risks and liability.

Intensification – dispersed or focused

23. Recent government direction relating to intensification under the NPS UD (around centres and rapid transit stations) and the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS) impact the council’s ability to influence where intensification could or should occur.

24. Intensification that is dispersed (what MDRS enables) is likely to result in low(er) levels of intensification across most of the urban area. This will impact on the ability to provide services over time, for example, public transport.

25. Focused intensification would direct growth to specific areas or locations, for example, around centres, areas with good public transport access or near areas of high employment.

26. A combination of these two approaches would allow intensification across much of Auckland but would also allow greater intensification in specific areas. This approach may undermine the level of intensification in places that are best suited, as growth would also be happening in many other places.

27. Strategic direction:

· work within the legal parameters, use the levers we still have available to focus intensification

· quality aspects are increasingly important with intensification, including the value of greenspace.

Infrastructure

28. Funding and financing all the infrastructure needed in Auckland is a significant challenge. The council cannot provide infrastructure everywhere at the same time and reconsideration is needed of where funding will be focused / provided, and who funds what aspects and to what extent.

29. Strategic direction:

· strong, clear signals are needed that the council will use infrastructure as a lever to support or not support development

· the timing and sequencing of development in strategic plans must be followed.

Greenfields and future urban areas

30. The current Development Strategy (and the Auckland Unitary Plan) provide for 15,000ha of greenfields / future urban land, sequenced for development over a 30-year period. In the first decade (2017-2027) 32% of that land was live-zoned and more future urban land is being considered for live-zoning through private plan changes.

31. Live-zoning is happening much faster and in a haphazard way, creating major infrastructure issues. Additionally, some of this future urban land will, in future, be exposed to greater flooding risk and other natural hazards.

32. Strategic direction:

· reconsider and possibly pull back some Future Urban zone areas, particularly:

o areas at risk of flooding and natural hazards

o other areas given the direction on emissions reduction

· the FDS should give strong signals regarding non-live zoned Future Urban zone land e.g., in terms of sequencing of development and infrastructure provision.

Business and employment

33. Business operations and future needs are changing, for example, the impacts of Covid and working from home, increases in online retail, the needs for large footprint businesses and the role that local centres may play in future.

34. Auckland Council’s data on business land, needs and trends needs updating and work is underway to address this.

35. Strategic direction:

· business land, operations and future needs is an important aspect of the FDS and further research is supported, particularly in relation to the demand for industrial space, robotic warehousing, the weightless economy and the impacts of covid

· access to business and employment is a critical issue, both in terms reducing the need to travel through proximity to residential areas, and accessibility by public transport and active modes

· the importance of access to and provision of quality employment opportunities for Māori and Māori businesses.

Work programme – timeframes, key milestones

36. The high-level milestones of the FDS are set out below. The FDS will be completed by mid-2023 to provide clear strategic direction to the 2024 LTP, as directed by the NPS UD.

37. Research, stakeholder engagement and development of the draft FDS will be on-going in 2022. Engagement with Tāmaki Makaurau Māori and key stakeholders is planned throughout 2022 and the first half of 2023. Public consultation is expected in the first half of 2023.

A picture containing timeline

Description automatically generated

38. It is noted that local body elections will take place in October 2022 and the timeframes acknowledge that there will be a break in Planning Committee and local board meetings at this time.

39. Local board chairs (or alternates) were invited to a series of Planning Committee workshops in the first half of 2022.

40. Indicative timeframes and the proposed format for local board involvement are set out in the table below.

Indicative timeframe	Proposed format
July 2022	Introductory briefing
July / August 2022	Reports to business meetings
August / September 2022	Planning Committee – endorse strategic direction
October 2022	Local body elections
Quarter 1 2023	Planning Committee – approval for public consultation
Quarter 2 2023	Workshops
Quarter 2 2023	Reports to business meetings
Quarter 3 2023	Planning Committee – adopt updated FDS

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

41. There is an increasing national focus on climate change through legislation^{^[1]} and through initiatives such as declaration of climate emergencies^{^[2]} and the report of the Climate Change Commission (June 2021). The council adopted Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan in 2020. The plan provides a long-term approach to climate action, with a target to halve regional emissions by 2030 and transition to net zero emissions by 2050. The built environment is one of the priority areas within the plan and the associated action areas focus on reducing emissions and adapting to the impacts of climate change.

42. The government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (May 2022) and the council’s Transport Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) being developed are recent plans seeking to reduce emissions. The TERP will provide a pathway for achieving a modelled 64 per cent reduction in transport emissions by 2030 in Auckland. Staff are working to align land use aspects of the TERP and the FDS to 2030, while acknowledging that land use and planning decisions typically see climate impacts over the longer-term. This means that decisions need to be made now to realise the benefits as soon as possible.

43. Land use and planning decisions, particularly those around urban form, development and infrastructure, are fundamental to climate action. The impacts of different growth scenarios on climate change mitigation and adaptation are essential to the development of the FDS. These decisions influence and lock in our emissions trajectory and our ability to deal with the risks and impacts of a changing climate for decades to come.

44. For example, in relation to transport emissions, more expansive urban forms generally lead to longer travel distances. Longer trip lengths typically result in higher transport emissions and less propensity for mode shift. Strategic land use decisions consider climate change risks and impacts such as the effects of coastal inundation and sea level rise.

45. The approach taken in the FDS and the council’s approach to implementation has the potential for significant long-term implications. These aspects will be further researched and developed over the course of the project.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

46. The FDS provides Auckland-wide alignment on growth and development approaches and influences council strategies, programmes of work and investment decisions. Involvement, information and support from staff across the council group is a critical aspect needed to achieve alignment.

47. A range of relevant staff from across the organisation, including the Council-Controlled Organisations, are involved in the project’s topic areas or workstreams.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. The FDS is the long-term strategic spatial plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. The FDS provides information on how, when and where growth is anticipated. This is a topic which is of relevance to local boards as growth and development can have significant impacts at a local board level and informs local board plans.

49. This report seeks local board views on the strategic approach to the Future Development Strategy prior to agreement being sought from the Planning Committee.

50. As the FDS work develops and becomes more detailed, local board specific material will be available and will be workshopped with local boards. This is planned for Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

51. The purpose of the FDS is to provide the basis for integrated, strategic and long-term planning. It will reflect the direction and outcomes in the Auckland Plan 2050 spatially. The updated FDS will include a clear statement of hapū and iwi values and aspirations for urban development based on engagement with relevant hapū and iwi (as required by the NPS UD).

52. Council has committed to achieving Māori outcomes through Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, influenced by the Māori Plan and Issues of Significance, and Auckland Plan 2050. These documents provide guidance in understanding the priority areas for Tāmaki Makaurau Māori and a number of these priority areas are relevant to the development and implementation of the FDS, for example:

· involve Māori early in the decision-making process

· Māori housing aspirations

· protection of existing natural resources

· allowing for kaitiakitanga

· benefits to Māori, for example, housing, economic opportunities, and improved access

· impacts of climate change, for example, on marae, whānau, and sites of significance

· opportunities to showcase Māori identity.

53. The priority areas already identified, along with feedback from previous engagement will be incorporated in the development of the FDS. This requires a review of past Māori engagement and provides a starting point for engaging with Māori, in a way that supports their capacity to genuinely participate in the development of the FDS.

54. Staff have developed a Māori engagement plan and are in the beginning phases of engaging with Māori across Tāmaki Makaurau.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

55. Costs for developing the FDS largely fall in FY23. This includes engagement and consultation aspects of the programme. Funding is provided in the 22/23 Annual Budget.

56. The FDS, once adopted, plays a significant role in future asset and service planning, especially assets and services related to growth. Decisions on this are subsequently made through Annual Plans, Long-term Plans, Regional Land Transport Plans etc.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

57. The council faces significant risks (achieving desired development outcomes, financial and reputational) in the absence of a clear, cohesive and strategic approach responding to the FDS requirements of the NPS UD and LGACA. The development of an FDS seeks to address those risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. Workshops are planned for the first half of 2023, when information specific to each local board will be available.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Claire Gray - Principal Advisor Growth & Spatial Strat

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager - Auckland Plan Strategy and Research