Agenda of Waitākere Ranges Local Board

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

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

Specifically, members are asked to identify any new interests they have not previously disclosed, an interest that might be considered as a conflict of interest with a matter on the agenda.

The following are declared interests of the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

Board Member	Organisation/Position
Mark Allen	- Community Waitākere – Executive Officer - Bethells Valley Fire – Senior Fire Fighter - Waitākere Licensing Trust – Trustee
Michelle Clayton	- Glen Eden Community House – Treasurer - Glen Eden Residents’ Association – Member - Waitākere Community Organisation Grants Scheme (COGS) – Committee Member - The Personal Advocacy and Safeguarding Adults Trust – Trustee - Glen Eden Returned Services Association (RSA) – Member - Glen Eden Railway Trust – Member - Te Wahi Ora Charitable Trust - Member
Sandra Coney	- Cartwright Collective – Member - Women’s Health Action Trust – Patron - New Zealand Society of Genealogists – Member - New Zealand Military Defence Society – Member - Pest Free Piha – Partner is the Coordinator - Piha Tennis Club – Patron and Partner is the President - Piha Wetland Trust – Partner is a Trustee - Waitākere Ranges Pest Free Alliance – Partner is the Co-Chair of this group - Waitematā District Health Board – Elected Member & Chair of Hospital Advisory Committee
Greg Presland	- Whau Coastal Walkway Environmental Trust – Trustee - Combined Youth Services Trust – Trustee - Glen Eden BID – Member - Titirangi Ratepayers and Residents Association – Member - Waitākere Ranges Protection Society - Member - Titirangi RSA - Member
Saffron Toms	- Titirangi Community House – Secretary - Huia-Cornwallis Residents and Ratepayers Association – Committee Member
Ken Turner	- Huia-Cornwallis Residents and Ratepayers Association – Committee Member

Member appointments

Board members are appointed to the following bodies. In these appointments the board members represent Auckland Council:

External organisation	Lead	Alternate
Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group	Mark Allen	Saffron Toms
Ark in the Park	Mark Allen	Sandra Coney
Friends of Arataki and Waitākere Regional Parkland Incorporated	Michelle Clayton	Sandra Coney
Glen Eden Business Improvement District (Glen Eden Business Association)	Michelle Clayton	Greg Presland
Glen Eden Playhouse Theatre Trust	Ken Turner	Mark Allen
Te Uru Waitakere Contemporary Gallery	Mark Allen	Saffron Toms and Sandra Coney
The Rural Advisory Panel	Ken Turner	Saffron Toms

4 Confirmation of Minutes

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 23 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

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 Waitākere Ranges 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 Deputation: Restoration Ruatuna - Activities update

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from Restoration Ruatuna.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Deirdre Green and Professor Len Gillman, on behalf of Restoration Ruatuna, will be attending to discuss the results of the recent evaluation of the alignment between the Muddy Creeks Local Area Plan and the group's current projects and activities. The findings show that the group is currently delivering 75 per cent of the LAP's suggested activities that concern the natural environment.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on Restoration Ruatuna’s activities and thank Deirdre Green and Professor Len Gillman, on behalf of Restoration Ruatuna, for their 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.”

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

Proposed transfer of land at 14 and 20 Glenesk Road, Piha for inclusion into the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park

File No.: CP2022/08833

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on the proposed transfer of land at 14 and 20 Glenesk Road, Piha, for future use as part of the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In 2019, Infrastructure and Environmental Services (I&ES) purchased the properties at 14 and 20 Glenesk Road, Piha, due to flooding which inundated the land and associated residences.

3. Infrastructure and Environmental Services, through Healthy Waters (HW), presented options to the Waitākere Ranges Local Board for the future use of 14 and 20 Glenesk Road, Piha, at a workshop in December 2021.

4. As a result of the workshop, I&ES proposed to transfer the land to the Parks, Sports, and Recreation (PSR) Department of Customer and Community Services (C&CS), for both regional park and local park use, subject to PSR agreement.

5. Parks, Sports and Recreation and Community Facilities (CF) assessed the proposal and concluded that the land is suitable for inclusion into the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park but is not suitable for a local park.

6. The risk of flooding and the small size of the sites are the primary reasons why the land did not meet the threshold for a local park.

7. Healthy Waters has accepted the assessment, and subject to budget allocation and Governing Board approval, will transfer the land to PSR for inclusion in the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) provide any views and preferences on the proposed transfer of land from Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Healthy Waters to Customer and Community Services, Parks, Sports and Recreation, and the future use of 14 and 20 Glenesk Road, Piha, for the purpose of a regional park.

Horopaki

Context

8. Parts of Piha experienced considerable flooding on 3 February and 25 April 2018. The nature of this catchment is that it experiences relatively frequent flooding which features rapid increases in water level and velocities.

9. Numbers 14 and 20 Glenesk Road were inundated by flood waters which caused significant damage to the dwellings situated on the land.

A picture containing text, map

Description automatically generated

10. As a result of the flooding, HW determined that the risk of continued habitation was too great and negotiated the purchase of both properties in 2019. The acquisitions were authorised by the Chief Executive, under delegated authority from the Governing Body.

11. The dwellings on both properties have subsequently been removed and the sites cleared of improvements.

12. The Waitākere Ranges Local Board and the Piha Ratepayers and Residents Association have shown an interest in the future use of these properties.

13. A Healthy Waters memo presented during a local board workshop on 9 December 2021 recommended that the properties be incorporated into the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park. During the workshop HW also proposed that a part of the land could become a local park, as shown in the plan below, subject to the following caveats:

i) no long-term parking on the land. Dropping off of materials is acceptable, provided there is no damage to the restored area

ii) no permanent structures on the site

iii) temporary structures such as sheds and water tanks should be raised >1.2m above ground.

iv) only to be accessed in fine weather

v) no raised garden beds

vi) the local board needs to be made aware that the land will be submerged approximately once per year on average

vii) there are high safety risks with being in contact with any flood waters around the site. Ten per cent annual exceedance probability (AEP) flood level is 7.75mRL and the one per cent AEP flood level is 8.3mRL.

14. This HW proposal was in response to the local board expressing an interest in the possibility of establishing a community garden on 14 Glenesk Road.

15. Community gardens are not part of a regional park function; therefore, any community garden would need to be managed as a local park (under the authority of the local board). After the workshop, Healthy Waters proposed to PSR that:

i) 20 Glenesk Road land becomes regional park land

ii) the front half of the 14 Glenesk Road land (defined by the stream) becomes a local park managed by Community Facilities

iii) within the 14 Glenesk Road land, the green area on the plan above is revegetated with appropriate vegetation

iv) the purple area within 14 Glenesk Road would be available for a community garden, with the appropriate Health and Safety requirements in place and subject to Community Facilities and the local board agreeing to the proposal

v) Parks, Sports, and Recreation would also consult with HW over the proposed activity (vegetable garden) on the local park, as it is within the flood plain area. Healthy Waters would still maintain responsibility for flood management over this local park area

vi) the back half of 14 Glenesk Road land (defined as the land to the north of the stream) becomes regional park land.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Staff members from PSR (Regional Parks, and Community Parks and Places) met onsite on 3 February 2022 to inspect the properties and consider the proposal to transfer land to PSR.

Community Parks and Places Response

17. This response only considers the area outlined in green and purple on 14 Glenesk Road, as per above – purple shown as a proposed community garden.

18. The proposed site is not suitable as a local park for the following reasons:

i) the area (outlined in purple of approximately 250m²) is too small to provide enough space to enable local parks outcomes and experiences. Thus, is not considered viable as a local park (noting that the balance of the land (outlined in green) is not suitable for community use because of flood risk and is anticipated to be restored to indigenous vegetation).

ii) the site has several constraints which would complicate the proposed activity of a community garden, including:

iii) community gardens are typically much larger than 250m² and generally associated with other community uses. Local parks need to be 1500 to 3000m² to be a viable open space that economically generates local recreation outcomes. The proposed area of the land is considerably less than that of a generic pocket park, which are rarely accepted into the parks and open space network.

iv) the proposed park is situated on a former concrete driveway and garage. On site observation showed the land to be lacking topsoil and comprising basecourse that is typically used under concrete.

v) therefore, the proposed use as a community garden will require the use of raised beds and these are not approved or recommended by Healthy Waters.

vi) legitimate parks experiences that could be hosted at the area outlined in purple, such as ‘connecting with nature’ or eco-volunteering, could be enabled under regional park management.

vii) The land is on a flood plain.

Regional Parks response

19. Both sites, 14 and 20 Glenesk Road are acceptable for inclusion into the Waitākere Ranges Regional Park, for the following reasons:

i) the land attributes, when added to the existing regional park, will meet the purpose and benefit of a regional park. “Regional parks help protect and enhance our diverse indigenous ecosystems, cultural heritage and landscapes, and provide Aucklanders and visitors with access to nature on land and to the coast.” Draft Regional Parks Management Plan.

ii) both sites are contiguous with the regional park – the inclusion will involve:

A) resolution by the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee to include the properties into the regional park. The decision should address the considerations applying under Waitākere Ranges Heritage Act 2008.

B) ‘Order In Council’ to include the land in the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area (Waitākere Ranges Heritage Act 2008). Council may also, if it wishes, seek an ‘Order In Council’ for the prohibition on disposal of land to apply to these properties, under s 139(2) of the Local Government Act 2002.

C) rezone from Residential - Rural and Coastal Settlement zone to Open Space - Conservation Zone.

20. Acceptance of the land as regional park is subject to the following conditions:

i) both sites are tested for soil contamination with sampling to take place on and around former structures such as dwellings, sheds, garages, and driveways. Thresholds shall be determined by National Environmental Standards (NES) assessing and managing contaminants in soil to protect human health. Any contaminants over acceptable thresholds shall be removed and the soil remediated in accordance with the NES guidelines.

ii) all inorganic and organic waste shall be removed, which shall include stockpiles of vegetative matter.

iii) apart from grass, non-indigenous plants shall be removed from the land.

iv) a landscape and planting plan shall be prepared for approval by Regional Parks.

v) upon approval, HW will engage a suitable contractor experienced in restoration planting and to complete a maintenance programme of three years before handover to Regional Parks.

vi) install park bollards along the road boundary of 14 Glenesk Road to prevent unauthorised vehicle access. Bollards are to comply with the Piha Area Design Guidelines

vii) Healthy Waters are to pay for the conditions i-vi (above) and the costs of the transfer process 20ii a-c

viii) approval of the inclusion of the land as regional park will be by resolution of the Parks, Arts, Community and Events (PACE) Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. Because this report seeks local board views rather than a decision and subsequent action, there is no climate impact associated with this report.

22. If the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee resolves to include the land as regional park, decisions on the future use of this land will be made by the Governing Body. A climate impact statement will be included in the report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee.

23. Revegetating the land with bush and indigenous vegetation will positively impact on carbon reduction.

24. A community garden can also have positive effects, as locally grown produce reduces transport costs and creates more resilient communities, however the garden itself would always be at risk of inundation or destruction by climatic events.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. The decision to purchase these two residential properties was made by Healthy Waters.

26. The principal purpose was to reduce risk to life and property from flooding.

27. This report addresses future use of the land, recognising its land use limitations and the aspirations of the local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. Healthy Waters has contemplated the future use and utility of the two properties since their acquisition and after the dwellings were removed.

27. While decision making delegations for the land and its use fall outside those of the local board, Healthy Waters has communicated its proposals to the local board through two memos and a workshop.

28. Prior to presenting a report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for a decision, this report seeks the views from the local board on the recommended transfer of ownership and future use of the land as a regional park.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. This proposal was presented to the Mana Whenua forum on 12 May 2022. Observations from the Iwi representatives present were to support the inclusion of all the land into Regional Park.

30. A further independent engagement was held with Te Kawarau a Maki on 16 June 2022 to seek its views and feedback was supportive of inclusion into the regional park. The community garden was not opposed but noted the tikanga between marakai and wharepaku.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31. The conditions of acceptance of the land as regional park include HW paying for all costs of the transfer. The restoration (rubbish removal, decontamination, weeding and planting) are also to be paid for by HW. Estimated costs of preparing the land for transfer are estimated to be approximately $150,000.00.

32. Operational expenditure after a three-year period of establishment will be minimal as the land will be regenerating forest. Usual weed and pest control will be funded by Regional Parks. Ongoing operational expenditure will be approximately $8,000 p.a. and will be covered by the vested assets consequential budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

33. There have been eight recorded severe flood events in Piha, with rainfall greater than 50mm in the past twenty years, (Refer Attachment A - Healthy Waters spreadsheet on recorded flood events). The NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric) report on the Auckland Region Climate Change (Attachment B) predicts that rainfall event intensity will become greater and more frequent as global warming occurs.

34. The risk analysis below highlights the options considered.

Option	Analysis	Risk Level
Option 1 (local park)	Local parks are primarily involved with community activities on land; playgrounds, sports fields, community gardens and buildings supporting community activities. These activities are a high risk to life and property given a frequently activating flood plain with high depth and velocity.	High
Option 2 (regional park)	Regional parks are typically provided for conservation and preservation of land at scale. Non-permanent passive use by people is compatible with the risks of these sites and is an option because both sites are contiguous with the existing Waitākere Ranges Regional Park, and easily incorporated into the park.	Low
Option 3 (stormwater asset)	Ongoing Healthy Waters ownership provides for specific land parcels to be under the control of Healthy Waters, for example drainage reserves. The Three Waters Reform poses some uncertainty over the future control of this land. It is considered preferable that control of the land stays with Local Government.	Moderate

35. The risks of establishing a community garden on the land are numerous, particularly to people. The risk of repetitive destruction of the community garden by climatic events and costs of repair, along with the small size of the site, are incompatible with open space provision and outcomes.

36. The graphic below shows the upstream location of septic tanks on Glenesk Road. Septic tanks rely on drainage to a disposal field where any remaining pathogens are absorbed and neutralised by microbial action in the soil. Flooding of septic tanks and disposal fields mobilises pathogens and transports them downstream. There is a risk that faecal contamination will occur downstream on to 14 and 20 Glenesk Road after a flood event.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. Receive the views of the local board and include them in a report to the Parks, Arts, Community and Events Committee for a decision on transferring the land to Parks, Sports, and Recreation Department for regional park purposes.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Reported Flooding Summary	17
b ⇩	Auckland Region Climate Change Projections	19

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Tony Edney - Principal Property Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Community Facilities

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

PDF Creator

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

Glen Eden Streets for People Cycleway Trial: Monitoring and Evaluation Report

File No.: CP2022/02597

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive the Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the Glen Eden Streets for People cycleway trial and for the local board to make a decision on the next steps.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. A trial cycleway has been in place for 14 months on a section of Captain Scott Road, linking the existing Twin Streams shared path from the end of Savoy Road through to Glen Eden town centre and train station.

3. The local board along with Auckland Transport successfully applied to Waka Kotahi’s Innovating Streets for People pilot fund for funding for the project.

4. The fund is intended to test out changes to the street with temporary interventions.

5. A Monitoring and Evaluation Plan was prepared with input from community workshops to develop “success factors”. Monitoring has included:

· Cycling counts

· Traffic speeds

· Parking impacts

· Perceptions of road safety (survey).

6. Cycling counts and traffic speed monitoring were done as a daily count on three separate occasions to provide a snapshot. The trial has seen cycling numbers increase from 17 cycling/scooter journeys recorded in November 2020 prior to the cycleway being put in place, to 34 cycling trips a day measured on a weekday in February 2022.

7. Traffic speeds were reduced to a safer level by the temporary traffic calming put in place.

8. There were just over 660 responses to the safety survey which provides insights into community perceptions of the cycleway.

9. The trial cycleway has been tested in a time of significant disruption to everyday activities due to the impacts of the Covid pandemic. More people have been working from home, schools were closed for most of the second half of 2021, travel has decreased, including less people using public transport. The aim of enabling more people to connect to train services by bike, and increasing the uptake of cycling to school have not been tested in normal times.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendations

That the Waitākere Ranges Local Board:

a) receive the Glen Eden Streets for People Monitoring and Evaluation Report (Attachment A), including results of the perception survey and other community feedback.

b) recommend to Auckland Transport that the temporary Glen Eden Streets for People cycleway be removed.

c) request Auckland Transport to develop options for a permanent Glen Eden Streets for People cycleway and report back to the Board for consideration as part of the Local Board Transport Capital Fund prioritisation process.

Horopaki

Context

10. The Waitakere Ranges Greenways Plan[1] (2019) provides a long-term vision for a walking and cycling network in the local board area, and identifies priorities in Glen Eden.

11. One of the priorities identified in the plan is a connection from Glen Eden Train Station to Upper Waikumete Stream Walk and Cycleway (G7).

12. The trial cycleway on Captain Scott Road aimed to test whether a separated on-road cycleway would provide a safe route for cyclists and encourage more people to cycle in the area. The Glen Eden Urban Design Framework (2010, WCC) envisaged a cycling route along Captain Scott Road.

13. The local board initiated trial was funded by the Waka Kotahi Innovating Streets for People pilot fund and delivered by Auckland Transport. It had a total available budget of $210,000 with the local board contributing a 10 percent local share.

14. Implementation of the cycleway overlapped with the ‘Glen Eden Pedestrian Safety Improvements’ taking place in the town centre over the same period. As a consequence, the cycleway was not put in place until early June 2021 once Auckland Transport had completed street upgrades on Captain Scott Road, which meant starting the cycleway trial in winter.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. A Monitoring and Evaluation Report on the trial cycleway is attached (Attachment A).

16. The key findings are:

i) the number of cycle/scooter trips have increased showing 34 cycle/scooter trips a day on a weekday in February 2022. This compares to 17 cycling trips a day pre-installation of the cycle facilities.

ii) in the survey, 152 people said they used the cycleway, with 76 people saying they used it either a ‘few times a week’ (45) or a ‘few times a month’ (31).

iii) two thirds of those using the cycleway a few times a month or more say it has made it feel safer, and gave it a 4/5 or 5/5 for safety.

iv) just under 60 percent of regular users said they supported the design, while 16 percent gave only qualified support (support in part, or with an improved design). The level of support was lower amongst occasional users of the cycleway. A review of the design is an opportunity to increase the approval rating from existing users.

v) 64 percent of survey respondents said they did not support the trial. A loss of on-street parking, negative driver experience, visual appearance, and perceived lack of use by cyclists are cited as reasons for not supporting the trial by people who live near to it (63 percent) and to a slightly lesser degree by those who living further away (55 percent).

vi) from a driving perspective two thirds (66 percent) of survey respondents said it makes the road feel less safe due to narrowing, intersections and, for some, driveway exits. The Auckland Transport standard engineering width for on-street parking is 2.1m so the road width has widened.

vii) traffic speeds were slower, reducing from 57 km/h (85^th percentile) prior to the cycleway being installed to 45.6 km/h (85^th percentile) in the most recent monitoring results from the week of 9 February 2022.

viii) a number of success factors have not been reliably tested by the trial due to the impact of Covid restrictions and the change to travel behaviour. Public transport use has fallen across the region, schools were closed for a significant period, more people have been working from home, the pattern of parking has changed in Evans Road.

17. The trial improved the perception of safety for cyclists, while motorists said it felt less safe for driving.

Retaining or removing the temporary cycleway

18. The following considerations are recommended in making a decision on whether to retain or remove the cycleway.

	Consideration	Comment
1	Response of community and stakeholders to the installation	64 per cent of survey respondents did not support the trial. Loss of on-street parking was not supported, compared to the number of people using the cycleway. Overall support from cycleway users was 45 per cent, with a further 19 per cent saying they supported in part or with an improved design. The level of support was higher amongst regular users, when compared to occasional users.
2	Success against the specified project outcomes	Cycle/scooter trips increased to 34 trips a day in February, though remain comparatively low.
3	Road safety impacts of the installation	63 per cent of cycleway users said it felt safer or slightly safer than before. Those who used the cycleway regularly gave it a higher safety rating than occasional users. 66 per cent of survey respondents said the road felt less safe for driving than before. Traffic speeds reduced.
4	Impact on the functioning of the transport system for all modes	Vehicle speeds along this section of Captain Scott Road have decreased to be compliant with the speed limit. Apart from the reduction in speeds, all modes are able to operate as they could pre-installation.
5	Pathway to permanence – how far away is the permanent installation?	There is no funding available to a pathway to permanence.
6	Anticipated cost of retention in the medium term and affordability	$50,000 for 12 months of maintenance subject to finding the budget as at present there is no extra funding available to maintenance in the medium term.
7	Any other project specific requirements arising from feedback during the trial	NA

‘Pathway to Permanence’

19. The temporary cycleway was intended to test in real time whether the design worked as a safe cycleway, increased the number of cyclists, and how the community viewed it. It allowed changes to be made in response to feedback.

20. The trial saw a small increase in the number of people cycling. It improved the perception of safety for those who used the cycleway a ‘few times a month’ or more, however occasional users were less convinced. Of those living near to the cycleway, 77 percent gave it a negative response of 1/5 or 2/5, while 17 percent gave it a positive response of 4/5 or 5/5.

21. There is currently no funding available for a pathway to permanence.

Issues that arose during the trial

Traffic safety of Savoy Road intersection

22. The main change made over the trial was in response to safety concern from motorists about the left hand turn into Savoy Road. This was relatively soon after installation. After assessment, the cycleway separators on the corner of Savoy Road and Captain Scott Road (southbound lane) were moved inward toward the kerb to allow more space for left turning traffic.

Vibrations from speed bumps

23. Some households near to the temporary speed bumps raised concern about excessive vibration as vehicles drove over them. In December 2021, the speed bumps were changed to lower profile cushions. These appeared to address the vibration concerns, or at least no further complaints were received. However, it gave rise to a new concern about unsafe driving behaviour with motorists moving onto the other side of the road to go around the speed cushions.

Household waste collection

24. The cycleway caused some conflict with the collection of household waste and recycling along the length of the cycleway. While this was managed, the conflict was not resolved and is something that is being looked at regionally by Auckland Council Waste Services.

Parking impacts

25. Over the course of the trial there were requests to remove the cycleway in favour of returning it to on-street parking. It was not possible to accommodate this without ending the trial.

26. The main concerns raised were family and friends not being able to visit, including some accessibility concerns; the impact on users of the sportsfields at Harold Moody and Duck Park; loss of parking for train commuters, and impact on adjoining streets.

27. Some Evans Road residents were concerned about increased parking and unsafe driver behaviour when the road was narrowed by parking on both sides.

28. Parking surveys carried out before and after the cycleway was put in place are included in Attachment A. Observations were carried out on nine occasions after implementation. Compliance with the controls put in place as part of the cycleway was relatively good, with little obstruction of the cycleway from vehicles parking within it. There were incidents of vandalism to the upright separators near to driveways and intersections with side streets.

29. Covid restrictions and related changes to travel behaviour are likely to have disrupted normal parking patterns in the area.

Number of cyclists

30. Counts of the number of cycle/scooter trips have been done on three occasions to provide a representative snapshot. The figures show an increase in the number of people cycling however the numbers remain low.

Pre-installation: 17 cycles/scooters per day

Post-installation: 34 cycles/scooters per day

Road safety perception

31. The cycleway has increased road safety perceptions for those whose have used the cycleway. It was given a 4/5 or 5/5 for safety by 67 percent of those who used it a ‘few times a month or more’, with 74 percent saying it felt safer or slightly safer than before.

32. The perception survey (see Attachment A, Appendix 4) contains feedback from 152 respondents who said they had used the cycleway, which provides insights into the user experience.

33. From a driver perspective it has negatively impacted perceptions of road safety, with two thirds of respondents saying it feels less safe for driving. The reasons given are that it is narrower, intersections, visual clutter from the cycleway separators, driveway entry/exits.

34. The cycleway width is 1.9m (including the width of the separators). This compares with the Auckland Transport engineering standard for on-street parking of 2.1m.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. Auckland Council is aiming to reduce transport emissions by 50 percent by 2030, which means a big shift is needed to change travel behaviour both locally and regionally. The trial cycleway aimed to encourage more people to cycle in Glen Eden and is a contributor to the general aim of changing travel behaviour. Of itself it would not have made a measurable impact given the number of cycle trips compared to the volume of traffic.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. Auckland Council Waste Services noted the challenge of collecting waste along the cycleway on Captain Scott Road, as well as with other cycleways across the region. It is a problem that is being looked at regionally rather than specifically in relation to this project.

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

Local impacts and local board views

37. The trial cycleway was initiated by the local board, who contributed a 10 percent local share of the funding. A recommendation is sought from the local board to determine whether to retain or remove the temporary cycleway, and whether to develop a permanent design.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. The trial cycleway re-purposed the kerb-side area of Captain Scott Road to extend the existing shared path from Savoy Road to Glen Eden town centre and train station. The aim was to test whether this worked as a safe cycling route and increased the uptake of active modes of transport.

39. It is part of the Te Ara Hono path linking Glen Eden to Kaurilands following the upper Waikumete Stream to Okaurirahi / Ceramco Park-Kaurilands Domain.

40. The trial was not seen to impact Māori any more significantly than other cultures and communities.

41. Te Kawerau ā Maki was engaged to develop designs for street art for the trial cycleway to make the pop-up cycleway visually engaging, however the design was not able to be implemented within the funding period.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. The trial was funded by Waka Kotahi Innovating Streets for People Pilot Fund, with a 10 percent local share funding by the Waitakere Ranges Local Board through the Local Board Capital Transport Fund (LBCTF) administered by Auckland Transport. The total available budget was $210,000 for delivery of the project within the previous financial year (2020-2021).

43. Auckland Transport will be providing the Local Board with an update on the Local Board Transport Fund following the setting of the 2022/2023 Annual Budget.

44. There is a cost to removing the trial cycleway which is currently unbudgeted. The work requires removing the separators, rubber speed cushions, and cycleway related road markings, reinstating previous road markings and making good any related defects.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

45. The cycleway was installed as a trial however it has now been in place for over 12 months.

46. Maintenance issues with the trial cycleway have been reported so steps need to be taken to address this if the cycleway is to remain for an interim period.

47. The temporary cycleway and traffic calming have reduced traffic speeds on Captain Scott Road and created a safer environment for cyclists. Taking the temporary infrastructure away may see traffic speeds increase and reduce safety for cyclists.

48. There is a need to communicate with local residents and stakeholders to explain the outcome of the trial and what the next steps are.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

49. Monitoring of the cycleway finished at the end of February 2022. The next steps are dependent on the direction from the local board.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Glen Eden Streets for People: cycleway trial: Monitoring and Evaluation Report, June 2021	389

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Owena Schuster – Elected Member Relationship Partner, Auckland Transport

Ted Massey - Transport Engineer, Auckland Transport

Brett Lane - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

PDF Creator

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Water Services Entities Bill - Waitākere Ranges Local Board feedback, July 2022	555

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

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

File No.: CP2022/10340

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 Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 in 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/s

That the Waitākere Ranges 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 (as 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:

- areas at risk of flooding and natural hazards

- 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-19 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-19

· 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^{^[2]} and through initiatives such as declaration of climate emergencies^{^[3]} 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 in 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

Authors

Claire Gray - Principal Advisor Growth & Spatial Strat

Authorisers

Jacques Victor - GM Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Waitākere Ranges Local Board

28 July 2022

Joint Council-Controlled Organisations - Local Board Engagement Plan (2022-2024); with an update on Quarter 3 (2021/2022)

File No.: CP2022/07137

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the joint Council-controlled Organisations – Waitākere Ranges Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024.

2. To provide an update on activity in the third quarter of 2021/2022 from the Council-controlled Organisations (CCO) work programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Joint CCO - Local Board Engagement Plan has been developed between local boards and CCO staff during workshops held in April and May.

4. The engagement plan, 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 Waitākere Ranges Local Board::

a) adopt the Joint Council-controlled Organisations – Waitākere Ranges Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 as an agreement between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-controlled Organisations: Auckland Transport, Eke Panuku Development Auckland, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited and Watercare.

b) note that the agreed work programmes of the four substantive Council-controlled Organisations are appended to the Joint Council-controlled Organisation (CCO) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 (Attachment A to the agenda report) and these work programmes will be updated as needed by the CCOs, with changes reported to the local board each quarter.

c) authorise the Chair of the local board to sign this agreement on behalf of the local board, alongside representatives from the four Council-controlled Organisations.

d) note the quarter three update to the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCOs) Local Board Engagement Plan 2021/2022.

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 2022-2024 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 2022-2023 budgets will be included as they become available.

Changes to the engagement plan for the 2022-2024 period

18. The substantive part of the Joint Council-controlled Organisations (CCO) Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 is very similar to the 2021/2022 plan. Staff have updated the plan where there have been:

· new board members

· changes to local board members delegations

· staff changes within Local Board Services or CCOs.

19. It is noted that the 2021/2022 plan was explicitly adopted as a living document, subject to change with each quarterly update. There are therefore some substantive differences between the CCO work programmes adopted in July 2021 as part of the 2021/2022 Local Board Engagement Plans and the work programmes (appended to Attachment A to this report) for 2022 - 2023.

20. When compared to the 2021/2022 CCO work programmes, the new work programmes attached to the 2022-2024 plan have significant changes in terms of the focus, prioritisation, level of detail, format, wording, and style.

21. For example, Auckland Transport has less activities in the work programme when compared to the previous year and focused on those activities where more local board involvement is anticipated. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, on the other hand, has chosen to expand its work programme, incorporating a broader regional view.

22. It is also noted that the engagement approach, established with a five-point scale in 2021, has now been revised and uses a simplified three-point scale to indicate the expected level of involvement of the local board in each activity.

New activities included in the CCO work programmes (appended to Attachment A) include:

CCO name	New activity
Auckland Transport	Piha Bus Trial
	Local Board Capital Transport Fund projects 1. Parrs Park to Sunnyvale shared path 2. Verdale Circle to Glendale Road walkway 3. Candia Road, Swanson / Henderson Valley (Part 1) – pedestrian safety 4. Candia Road, Swanson / Henderson Valley (Part 2) – parking restrictions outside Henderson Valley Scenic Reserve 5. Glen Eden Train Station to Upper Waikumete Stream Walk and Cycleway 6. 79 Glendale Rd – raised table crossing 7. Titirangi / South Titirangi Road intersection pedestrian safety improvements.
	Regional programmes · parking strategy · safe speeds programme and speed management plan · Regional Public Transport Plan
Eke Panuku	No change

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited	The local board will be consulted on: · Supporting a resilient and regenerative Māori economy - Taki Hua economic strategy · Rangatahi youth enterprise summit.
	A significant number of new regional programmes have been added with an ‘inform’ level of engagement, (see attachment).
WaterCare	No change Two long term infrastructure works remain the focus of engagement with the local board: · Huia no.1 Watermain replacement · Huia Water Treatment Plant.

Activity highlights for Quarter Three update 2021/2022

Auckland Transport

23. West Auckland flood site mitigation. work has continued across multiple sites to repair road slips following the August 2021 storm. Auckland Transport has kept the local board updated on progress.

24. Glen Eden town centre pedestrian safety work has continued on West Coast Road and Glenview Road.

25. Local Board Capital Transport Fund. seven projects were approved in quarter two. A variation to the proposed path from Verdale Circle to Glendale Road was approved in April 2022.

26. Planning commenced on the Konini School safer streets project as part of the Ngā Tiriti Ngangahau –Vibrant Streets Programme.

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

27. Landowner approval – screen production: 13 film permits were issued in Quarter three (two in January, six in February, five in March.

Eke Panuku Development Auckland

28. Eke Panuku manages the commercial leases of the council-owned building at 202-208 West Coast Road, Glen Eden. Cleaning has been undertaken and maintenance work was scheduled to start at the end of May, including partial replacement of roof.

29. Portfolio Review / Asset Recycling: the local board provided input to a Reserves Act Hearing in February on revoking the reserves classification of two properties in Glen Eden (Brandon Walk, and .Glengarry Road) in preparation for their disposal.

WaterCare

30. Titirangi Road re-opened to traffic in both directions from late-May 2022 following lengthy closure as part of the Huia Number 1 Watermain replacement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. The adoption of the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 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.

32. 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

33. Adopting the updated Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 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.

34. 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

35. 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.

36. 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

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

38. 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

39. The adoption of the Joint CCO Local Board Engagement Plan 2022-2024 between the local board and Auckland Council’s substantive Council-Controlled Organisations does not have financial impacts for local boards.

40. 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

41. 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

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2022-2024 Joint Council-Controlled Organisations - Local Board Engagement Plan	573

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Brett Lane - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Governance forward work programme - July 2022	601

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Waitākere Ranges Local Board Workshop Record 2 June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Waitākere Ranges Local Board Workshop Record 9 June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Waitākere Ranges Local Board Workshop Record 16 June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Waitākere Ranges Local Board Workshop Record 23 June 2022 (Under Separate Cover)

[2] Legislation includes Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019.

[3] Auckland Council declared a climate emergency in June 2019 while central government announced a climate emergency declaration in December 2020.

Chairperson	Saffron Toms
Deputy Chairperson	Greg Presland
Members	Mark Allen
	Michelle Clayton
	Sandra Coney, QSO
	Ken Turner

Authors	Nataly Sanchez - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Authors	Nataly Anchicoque - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager