Agenda of Franklin Local Board - Tuesday, 23 August 2022

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Franklin Rural Halls Funding for 2022/2023

File No.: CP2022/09937

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve funding for 19 Franklin rural hall committees for 2022/2023 and approve the future funding approach for community owned halls.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Nineteen community rural hall committees receive annual funding to deliver community places services across the Franklin Local Board area.

3. The Asset Based Services (ABS) operational (OPEX) budget available for the 19 rural halls in Franklin for 2022/2023 is $191,155.

4. In August 2020, the local board resolved to base future funding on five-year operational plans, taking into consideration the recommendations of the Rural Halls Future Directions report.

5. A phased approach is being used for the development of the five-year plans, using four tranches.

6. Staff have worked with nine hall committees in tranches one and two to develop five-year plans. This work included physical works cost projections and the inclusion of the committees’ future vision and objectives.

7. At a workshop held on 12 July 2022, the local board considered funding options, existing funding reserves and hall hire revenue for halls in tranches one and two. The local board indicated support for recommended option two.

8. In addition, the local board considered three options on the funding approach for community owned halls in tranches three and four, with the local board indicating support for recommended option three.

9. The board is now asked to formalise this direction.

10. With the local board’s approval, a Community Centre Management Agreement will be issued to the hall committees in tranche two.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) approve the five-year operational plans (Attachments A, B, C & D) as the basis for funding the following Franklin rural hall committees in 2022/2023:

· Aawhitu Central Hall

· Hūnua Hall

· Paparimu Hall

· Pukekohe East Community Centre

b) approve funding for the nine hall committees with five-year plans and funding reserves of $35,000 or over to receive 25 per cent of the recommended funding for 2022/2023, as follows:

Hall name	Funding 2022/2023
Glenbrook War Memorial Hall	$8,700
Karaka War Memorial Hall	$4,100
Te Toro Hall	$35,100
Waiau Pa Hall	$3,825
Waipipi Hall	$6,275
Aawhitu Central Hall	$27,000
Hūnua Hall	$14,000
Paparimu Hall	$23,000
Pukekohe East Hall	$7,750

c) approve a Community Centre Management Agreement be issued to Aawhitu, Hūnua, Paparimu and Pukekohe East hall committees.

d) approve the following funding for the remaining 10 Franklin rural hall committees currently without five-year plans in 2022/2023:

Hall name	Funding 2022/2023
Ararimu	$16,674
Buckland*	$0
Glenbrook Beach	$9,179
Grahams Beach Settlers	$5,008
Matakawau	$11,348
Mauku	$5,724
Pollok	$3,304
Pukeoware	$8,427
Puni	$3,226
Ramarama	$5,923

*Buckland Community Centre has a zero payment due to the continued closure of the hall and the lapsing of the hall committee as an incorporated society.

e) approve the funding approach for tranches three and four community owned halls based on average operating costs.

Horopaki

Context

11. There are 31 rural halls in the Franklin Local Board area, 23 of which are operated by community hall committees. The remainder are managed by the Auckland Council Venue Hire team.

12. Of the 23 halls, 19 receive an annual Asset Based Service (ABS) operational grant (OPEX) to manage and maintain the halls. The other four hall committees do not receive annual funding and council maintains the halls.

13. The annual grant for hall committees has historically been based on legacy targeted rates levied on each of the 19 rural hall areas, with a portion reserved to fund the management of these halls – including activities such as rubbish collection, capacity building and the annual rural halls hui.

14. In 2018, the Franklin Local Board directed staff to work towards achieving funding equity for the 19 Franklin rural halls receiving an annual operational grant.

Rural Halls Future Directions

15. Following the useful insights from the 2019 Community Voices in Community Places report and roadmap, which include information into what works well and what could be improved for community groups in community places, staff commissioned a report focusing specifically on council’s rural halls.

16. This work focuses on how rural halls are managed and operated, funded, and how they meet current and future needs in the context of growth and future priorities. It also considers the needs and aspirations of changing communities.

17. The report provides:

• insights on operational requirements to support locally relevant and successful rural halls;

• the ability for staff to provide quality advice around funding and support required for these venues to operate successfully and sustainably; and

• information for local board planning.

18. The Rural Halls Future Directions report recommends that each hall receiving annual funding from council has a three to five-year operational plan to enable funding to be based on actual costs rather than a legacy funding model.

19. In line with these recommendations, the Franklin Local Board approved the recommendations in the report (Resolution number FR/2020/81) to develop a five-year operational hall plan for all 19 halls using a phased approach across four financial years from 2020/2021 – 2023/2024. The plans will take into consideration the following factors:

· maintenance/physical works cost projections

· current annual council funding

· current funding reserves

· hall hire revenue

· committee vision and objectives, taking into account population growth.

20. Following this decision, a phased timetable in four tranches was developed to roll out the development of the five-year plans for the 19 rural halls.

Table 1: phased development of five-year plans Chart, treemap chart

Description automatically generated

21. Each five-year plan includes the hall committee’s vision and objectives together with a summary of information in asset management plans that set out projected costs for maintenance, renewals, capital works and operating costs over the next five years.

22. Tranche one was completed in 2020/2021 for Waiau Pa, Karaka, Te Toro, Glenbrook and Waipipi Halls.

23. Tranche two was completed in 2021/2022 for Aawhitu Central, Hūnua, Paparimu and Pukekohe East halls.

24. Development of the five-year plan for Matakawau Hall was deferred to tranche three due to the continued ill health of two key hall committee members.

25. Once the contents of the plans were agreed with the tranche two hall committees, they were finalised and used as the basis of funding recommendations. The tranche two plans are included as Attachments A, B, C & D.

26. The total ABS OPEX operational funding for the 19 committee managed rural halls in Franklin for 2022/2023 is $191,155.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Current funding

27. Following the development of the tranche two plans, it was evident that some of the halls required significant investment in asset maintenance over the five-year period, and that there would be a budget shortfall in 2022/2023.

29. At a workshop on 1 March 2022, the local board directed that the cost for asset maintenance for all halls in tranche two should be spread out over five to 10 years to decrease the total funding for 2022/2023. This was to ensure the total funding remained within the budget envelope.

30. This work was completed, and revised asset management plans were agreed with the hall committees in tranche two, resulting in a funding decrease of $82,000 for 2022/2023, which is reflected in the figures below.

31. Based on the updated information in the five-year plans, the asset management plans and the current funding for halls without plans, following is the total funding for 2022/2023 for the 19 halls that receive annual funding from council.

Table 2: Total annual funding for 19 halls

Hall (tranche one with five-year plans in place)

Funding 2022/2023 based on year 2 of five-year plans

Glenbrook War Memorial Hall	$34,800
Karaka Hall	$16,400
Te Toro Hall	$35,100
Waiau Pa Hall	$15,300
Waipipi Hall	$25,100
TOTAL	$126,700
Hall (tranche two with draft plans in place)	Funding 2022/2023
Aawhitu Central	$27,000
Hūnua	$56,000
Paparimu	$23,000
Pukekohe East	$31,000
TOTAL	$137,000
Hall (other halls without plans)	Funding 2022/2023 based on existing legacy funding
Ararimu	$16,674
Buckland*	$0
Glenbrook Beach	$9,179
Grahams Beach Settlers	$5,008
Matakawau	$11,348
Mauku	$5,724
Pollok	$3,304
Pukeoware	$8,427
Puni	$3,226
Ramarama	$5,923
TOTAL	$68,813
GRAND TOTAL (all 19 halls)	$332,513

*See information on Buckland Hall below

32. The above funding proposal provides a budget shortfall as follows:

Table 3: Total funding and budget shortfall

Total funding proposal for 19 hall committees for 2022/2023	Budget 2022/2023	Budget shortfall 2022/2023
$332,513	$191,155	$141,358

Funding options for tranches one and two

33. In 2021/2022, two options were put forward to fund the halls in tranche one. Option one was to fully fund the halls and option two was to part fund (50 per cent) the halls with reserves of $35,000 or above.

34. The local board approved option two, to part fund (50 per cent) the halls with reserves of $35,000 or above.

35. The local board indicated it will revisit the $35,000 threshold and the partial funding (50 per cent) annually.

36. At the 12 July 2022 local board workshop, the following five funding options for 2022/2023 were presented:

Table 4: Funding options 2022/2023 for tranches one and two

Option	Total funding 2022/2023	Advantages	Disadvantages
Option one (status quo) Retain the $35,000 threshold and part fund the halls at 50 per cent	$243,213	· Most hall committees still receive significant funding, including those with small funding reserves (e.g. Aawhitu Central Hall) · There is some reduction in funding for halls with large funding reserves	· The total funding is over the $191,155 budget envelope · The overspend is $52,058, with no current mechanism to make up the deficit · Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this option may be seen as penalising them
Option two (recommended) Retain the $35,000 threshold and part fund the halls at 25 per cent This is the recommended option as it keeps total funding closed to the budget envelope and promotes equity of funding for those halls which require the most work	$198,563	· Hall committees with major funding reserves receive reduced payments, in line with the local board’s direction · There is no reduction in payments for halls with smaller funding reserves (Te Toro, Paparimu and Aawhitu Central) · The total payment is close to the budget envelope	· Some halls with large funding reserves are still receiving fairly significant funding payments, although not as much as option one · There is a minor budget overspend of $7,408 which can be accommodated from current budgets
Option three Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 50 per cent	$214,163	· Hall committees with significant funding reserves receive some reduction in funding, encouraging them to use their funding reserves · Aawhitu Central Hall committee has a small funding reserve and will receive the full funding payment	· The total funding is over the $191,155 budget envelope · The budget overspend is $23,008 with no current mechanism to make up the deficit · Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this option may be seen as penalising them
Option four Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 25 per cent	$154,988	· Hall committees with significant funding reserves receive a major reduction in funding, encouraging them to use their funding reserves · This is in line with the local board’s resolution · Aawhitu Central Hall committee has a small funding reserve and will receive the full funding payment · This option keeps payments below the budget envelope	· The major reduction in funding for most halls may lead to difficulties for the hall committees in maintaining the halls · There is a significant budget underspend of $36,167, which would be better to be allocated to the halls rather than budget savings · This option could lead to less maintenance work being undertaken due to the significant funding reduction · Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this may be seen as penalising them
Option five Amend the threshold to $10,000 and part fund the halls at 50 per cent	$214,163	Same as option three	Same as option three

Option

Total funding 2022/2023

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option one

(status quo)

Retain the $35,000 threshold and part fund the halls at 50 per cent

$243,213

· Most hall committees still receive significant funding, including those with small funding reserves (e.g. Aawhitu Central Hall)

· There is some reduction in funding for halls with large funding reserves

· The total funding is over the $191,155 budget envelope

· The overspend is $52,058, with no current mechanism to make up the deficit

· Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this option may be seen as penalising them

Option two (recommended)

Retain the $35,000 threshold and part fund the halls at 25 per cent

This is the recommended option as it keeps total funding closed to the budget envelope and promotes equity of funding for those halls which require the most work

$198,563

· Hall committees with major funding reserves receive reduced payments, in line with the local board’s direction

· There is no reduction in payments for halls with smaller funding reserves (Te Toro, Paparimu and Aawhitu Central)

· The total payment is close to the budget envelope

· Some halls with large funding reserves are still receiving fairly significant funding payments, although not as much as option one

· There is a minor budget overspend of $7,408 which can be accommodated from current budgets

Option three

Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 50 per cent

$214,163

· Hall committees with significant funding reserves receive some reduction in funding, encouraging them to use their funding reserves

· Aawhitu Central Hall committee has a small funding reserve and will receive the full funding payment

· The total funding is over the $191,155 budget envelope

· The budget overspend is $23,008 with no current mechanism to make up the deficit

· Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this option may be seen as penalising them

Option four

Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 25 per cent

$154,988

· Hall committees with significant funding reserves receive a major reduction in funding, encouraging them to use their funding reserves

· This is in line with the local board’s resolution

· Aawhitu Central Hall committee has a small funding reserve and will receive the full funding payment

· This option keeps payments below the budget envelope

· The major reduction in funding for most halls may lead to difficulties for the hall committees in maintaining the halls

· There is a significant budget underspend of $36,167, which would be better to be allocated to the halls rather than budget savings

· This option could lead to less maintenance work being undertaken due to the significant funding reduction

· Due to the effects of COVID-19, some hall committees have had difficulty in carrying out the required work and built-up funding reserves, this may be seen as penalising them

Option five

Amend the threshold to $10,000 and part fund the halls at 50 per cent

$214,163

Same as option three

37. In addition to the above, the local board was provided with financial information on average hall hire revenue and current funding reserves held by each committee.

38. A full breakdown of the funding amounts each hall in tranches one and two would receive for each of the options has been provided in Attachment E.

39. At the workshop, there was support from the local board for recommended option two.

Funding options for tranches three and four

40. The three halls in tranche three (Pollok, Ararimu and Glenbrook Beach) are due to have a five-year plan developed in 2022/2023.

41. The halls are community owned and located on land owned by Auckland Council.

42. This will require a different process as the council asset team does not have adequate resources or the ability to on-charge costs for the development of an asset management plan for community owned buildings.

43. It is recommended that the development of five-year plans capturing the hall committees’ vision for the hall and the community it serves is made optional for these hall committees.

44. At the 12 July 2022 workshop, three options were provided to the local board for the approach to tranche three halls, which can also be applied to tranche four halls (community owned halls on community owned land) for 2023/2024.

Table 5: Funding options 2022/2023 for tranches three and four

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	Recommendation
Option one Use the existing legacy funding amount for community owned halls (status quo), with an optional five-year plan developed if required	· Straightforward to administer and gives the committees continuity in the amount funded · Ensures that the hall committees receive some funding for capital and renewals work and operating costs so that the halls are well maintained for community use	· Not in line with the local board’s resolution to change the method of funding for all Franklin rural halls · Does not address the issue of equity as it’s based on a legacy funding model · Contributes to capital and renewals work for a building that is not a council owned asset · Contributes to the total funding being above the budget envelope as some of the legacy payments are significant	Not recommended as it is not in line with the local board’s 25 August 2020 decision (resolution number FR/2020/81)
Option two Fund the halls based on an asset management plan developed by the hall committee which has been checked by the council assets team, with an optional five-year plan developed if required	· In line with the local board’s resolution to fund all Franklin rural halls based on actual costs · Ensures that the hall committees receive adequate funding for capital and renewals work and operating costs so that the halls are well maintained for community use	· Hall committees may be resistant to carrying out additional work to develop an asset management plan · There is a risk that the hall committees will not accurately record the costs in their asset management plans · Total funding for all halls is likely to be well in excess of the budget envelope, causing a significant shortfall which the local board will have to make up · Contributes to capital and renewals work for a building that is not a council owned asset	Not recommended as it means council will be funding the upkeep of a non-council asset
Option three Fund the halls based on average operating costs with an optional five-year plan developed if required	· Operating costs are readily available from information supplied to council and the average can easily be calculated without additional work by the hall committees · Ensures council is contributing to the operating costs of the community owned halls without funding capital works and renewals on a non-council asset · Will help to keep the total payment within the budget envelope	· Some hall committees will receive significantly less funding than under the previously legacy system · Halls may be less well maintained due to a decrease in funding · Hall committees may object to this option as it will mean receiving a significant funding decrease for some halls	Recommended option as this will ensure council continues to contribute to community owned halls whilst being able to stay within the budget envelope and will not fund capital and renewals work on a non-council asset

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Recommendation

Option one

Use the existing legacy funding amount for community owned halls (status quo), with an optional five-year plan developed if required

· Straightforward to administer and gives the committees continuity in the amount funded

· Ensures that the hall committees receive some funding for capital and renewals work and operating costs so that the halls are well maintained for community use

· Not in line with the local board’s resolution to change the method of funding for all Franklin rural halls

· Does not address the issue of equity as it’s based on a legacy funding model

· Contributes to capital and renewals work for a building that is not a council owned asset

· Contributes to the total funding being above the budget envelope as some of the legacy payments are significant

Not recommended as it is not in line with the local board’s 25 August 2020 decision (resolution number FR/2020/81)

Option two

Fund the halls based on an asset management plan developed by the hall committee which has been checked by the council assets team, with an optional five-year plan developed if required

· In line with the local board’s resolution to fund all Franklin rural halls based on actual costs

· Ensures that the hall committees receive adequate funding for capital and renewals work and operating costs so that the halls are well maintained for community use

· Hall committees may be resistant to carrying out additional work to develop an asset management plan

· There is a risk that the hall committees will not accurately record the costs in their asset management plans

· Total funding for all halls is likely to be well in excess of the budget envelope, causing a significant shortfall which the local board will have to make up

· Contributes to capital and renewals work for a building that is not a council owned asset

Not recommended as it means council will be funding the upkeep of a non-council asset

Option three

Fund the halls based on average operating costs with an optional five-year plan developed if required

· Operating costs are readily available from information supplied to council and the average can easily be calculated without additional work by the hall committees

· Ensures council is contributing to the operating costs of the community owned halls without funding capital works and renewals on a non-council asset

· Will help to keep the total payment within the budget envelope

· Some hall committees will receive significantly less funding than under the previously legacy system

· Halls may be less well maintained due to a decrease in funding

· Hall committees may object to this option as it will mean receiving a significant funding decrease for some halls

Recommended option as this will ensure council continues to contribute to community owned halls whilst being able to stay within the budget envelope and will not fund capital and renewals work on a non-council asset

45. At the workshop, there was support from the local board for recommended option three.

Other considerations

46. Buckland Community Centre (a community owned hall on community owned land) has been closed since March 2020 due to seismic issues identified at the hall (due to a decision made by the hall committee). They are due to have a five-year plan developed in tranche four.

47. Due to the continued hall closure the committee is unable to fulfil the requirements of the committee’s funding agreement, namely to:

· make the hall available to the community at reasonable rates of hire, utilising an effective booking system.

· maintain the hall and its grounds in a clean, tidy and safe state.

48. At present, the building has been stickered by council as an earthquake prone building and remains closed, on the decision of the hall committee.

49. The committee has lapsed as an incorporated society, and they are working towards re-registering with the Companies Office. When this process is complete, they can hold an AGM and elect a committee which can make decisions on the future of the hall.

50. In 2021/2022, the local board funded a Detailed Seismic Assessment for the hall at a cost of $8,500. No remedial work has been undertaken on the hall since then and it remains closed.

51. At the workshop held on 12 July 2022, the local board directed that Buckland Community Centre should not receive a funding grant in 2022/2023 for the above reasons.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

52. Maintaining a network of rural halls across the Franklin Local Board area reduces residents’ need to travel elsewhere for services run out of the halls, reducing carbon emissions associated with travelling.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

53. The Community Facilities team has indicated that they support the principle of funding halls on the basis of actual costs in the future.

54. Funding for rural halls is administered by the Community Delivery team, who have been kept up to date with the process to develop five-year plans.

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

Local impacts and local board views

55. At a workshop in 2018, the Franklin Local Board directed staff to work towards achieving funding equity for the 19 Franklin rural halls that receive annual funding grants.

56. In August 2020, the local board resolved that it supports continued work towards a funding model for 2021/2022 and beyond based on five-year operational hall plans.

57. At a workshop on 12 July 2022, the local board provided direction on rural halls funding for 2022/2023 and showed support for the recommended approach for future funding for halls in tranches three and four.

58. Most Franklin rural hall committees have indicated support for the development of five-year plans, using physical works cost projections as the basis for funding.

59. Five-year plans have been developed in collaboration with hall committees.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

60. Promoting a sustainable funding model promotes access to the halls for all members of the local board community, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

61. Total ABS operational funding for rural halls in Franklin for 2022/2023 is $191,155.

62. Recommended option two gives a budget shortfall of $7,408, which does not require the local board to reprioritise budget to fund the shortfall.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. Staff are progressing this work to take long-term steps in the mitigation of the risk presented by legacy funding of rural halls. The previous funding model was not based on actual costs or projections.

64. There is a primary risk associated with this funding model in the reduction of funding for some halls. This risk is mitigated as long-term funding will be informed by actual cost projections. Many halls have funding reserves from previous years and a healthy income from hireage revenue.

65. A subsequent risk is that hall committees receiving less funding will decide to hand back the management and maintenance of the halls to council. Should this occur, additional resources will be required for council to manage and maintain the halls. Work will need to be undertaken with the Community Facilities team should this occur.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

66. If approved by the local board, a Community Centre Management Agreement will be issued to each of the nine hall committees with five-year plans, and annual funding will be administered.

67. The remaining halls will receive an annual funding agreement until such time as a five-year plan is in place.

68. Payments will be made to all 19 hall committees in quarter two of the current financial year based on the board’s decision.

69. Work will commence on developing five-year plans for tranche three halls (Pollok, Ararimu and Glenbrook Beach) and Matakawau Hall carried over from tranche two.

70. Funding for Franklin rural halls will continue to be approved on an annual basis by the local board.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Awhitu Central Hall Plan 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Hunua Hall Plan 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Paparimu Hall Plan 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Pukekohe East Hall Plan 2022 (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇩	Funding Detail for Tranche One and Two Halls	19

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Jane Cain - Place & Partner Specialist
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Attachment E

Detailed funding for tranche one and two halls under proposed options for 2022/2023

Option one (status quo)

Retain the $35,00 threshold and part fund the halls at 50%

Hall	Funding $
Glenbrook War Memorial	17,400
Karaka	8,200
Te Toro	35,100
Waiau Pa	7,650
Waipipi	12,550
Aawhitu Central	27,000
Hūnua	28,000
Paparimu	23,000
Pukekohe East	15,500
Total for remaining halls without five-year plans	68,813
Total funding for 2022/2023	243,213

Option two (recommended option)

Retain the $35,000 threshold and part fund the halls at 25%

Hall	Funding $
Glenbrook War Memorial	8,700
Karaka	4,100
Te Toro	35,100
Waiau Pa	3,825
Waipipi	6,275
Aawhitu Central	27,000
Hūnua	14,000
Paparimu	23,000
Pukekohe East	7,750
Total for remaining halls without five-year plans	68,813
Total funding for 2022/2023	198,563

Option three

Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 50%

Hall	Funding $
Glenbrook War Memorial	17,400
Karaka	8,200
Te Toro	17,550
Waiau Pa	7,650
Waipipi	12,550
Aawhitu Central	27,000
Hūnua	28,000
Paparimu	11,500
Pukekohe East	15,500
Total for remaining halls without five-year plans	68,813
Total funding for 2022/2023	214,163

Option four

Amend the threshold to $25,000 and part fund the halls at 25%

Hall	Funding $
Glenbrook War Memorial	8,700
Karaka	4,100
Te Toro	8,775
Waiau Pa	3,825
Waipipi	6,275
Aawhitu Central	27,000
Hūnua	14,000
Paparimu	5,750
Pukekohe East	7,750
Total for remaining halls without five-year plans	68,813
Total funding for 2022/2023	154,988

Option five

Amend the threshold to $10,000 and part fund the halls at 50%

Hall	Funding $
Glenbrook War Memorial	17,400
Karaka	8,200
Te Toro	17,550
Waiau Pa	7,650
Waipipi	12,550
Aawhitu Central	27,000
Hūnua	28,000
Paparimu	11,500
Pukekohe East	15,500
Total for remaining halls without five-year plans	68,813
Total funding for 2022/2023	214,163

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Franklin Partnership Grants 2022/2023

File No.: CP2022/11639

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To review approved in principle Franklin Partnership Grants 2022/2023 applications.

2. To reallocate $8,000 grants not uplifted from Franklin Integration Project Reference Group (Application FPG22-103).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Franklin Local Board provides strategic partnership grants to support local community groups and organisations to build capacity and capability, upskill staff and volunteers and become more sustainable to deliver on initiatives which align to the local board’s priorities and outcomes.

4. Applications were invited from 12 July 2021 to 21 August 2021. Fifteen applications were received (Attachment A) and assessed by a panel of staff for alignment to the criteria outlined in the Franklin Strategic Partnership Grants 2021/2022 framework (Attachment B).

5. A total of $175,000.00 was allocated in principle to fifteen projects in the financial year 2022/2023.

6. The Franklin Integration Project Reference Group (Application FPG22-103) was approved funding in principle of $8,000 to use in financial year 2022/2023 towards the Franklin Positive Ageing Expo in October 2022. The group has decided to cancel the event due to COVID restrictions and will not be uplifting this grant. They will reconvene in April 2023 to discuss running the event in October 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) review approved in principle Franklin Partnership Grants 2022/2023 applications.

Application	Organisation	Requesting for funding	Approved in principle 2022/2023
FPG22-101	Waiau Pa Hop Trust	Towards traffic management, waste management, event costs and advertising	$5,000.00
FPG22-102	Franklin Family Support Trust Board	Towards running free men’s courses, Pacifica courses and antenatal courses in the community	$10,000.00
FPG22-103	Franklin Integration Project Reference Group	Towards Franklin Positive Ageing Expo	$8,000.00
FPG22-104	Waiuku Business and Development Association Inc	Towards portable toilet hire, first aid station, traffic management, graphic design, waste management, production, and printing costs	$11,000.00
FPG22-105	Waiuku Business and Development Association Inc	Towards Event costs to run Waiuku Steel n Wheels	$10,000.00
FPG22-106	Manukau Beautification Charitable Trust	Towards the delivery costs of Eye on Nature at Botanic Gardens	$8,000.00

FPG22-107	Franklin A & P Society	Towards entertainment, seating and shade requirements for the A and P show	$20,000.00
FPG22-108	Counties Manukau Sports Foundation	Towards suppliers’ costs, venue hire and health and safety resources for the Franklin activities	$24,000.00
FPG22-109	Rotary Club of Pohutukawa Coast Rotary Inc	Towards the delivery costs of Maraetai Beachlands Trolley Derby at Omana Regional Park on 26 February 2022	$5,000.00
FPG22-110	Clevedon Agricultural & Pastoral Assn	Towards promotion, infrastructure, and provide free ‘in show’ entertainment	$20,000.00
FPG22-111	Manukau Heads Lighthouse Trust	Towards operations, maintenance of lighthouse, promotion, and installation of solar panel gates.	$15,000.00
FPG22-113	Clevedon Community Business Association Incorporated	Towards advertising, marketing, administration, workshop material, promotional updates, and signage	$12,000.00
FPG22-115	Waiuku Family Support Network Community Trust	Towards lease, insurance, and rates	$10,000.00
FPG22-117	YMCA North	Towards training Hunua Falls Water Safety advisors, uniforms and staff costs of water safety advisors being at the falls during necessary hours to keep community safe	$12,000.00
FPG22-118	Takutai Community Charitable Trust	Towards project coordinator, banners, flags, printing and stationery, travel, and advertising.	$5,000.00

Total			$175,000.00

b) reallocate $8,000 grants not uplifted from Franklin Integration Project Reference Group (Application FPG22-103)

Application	Organisation	Requesting for funding	Approved in principle 2022/2023
FPG22-103	Franklin Integration Project Reference Group	Towards Franklin Positive Ageing Expo	$8,000.00

Horopaki

Context

7. The purpose of the strategic partnerships grant is to support local community organisations to deliver against the following outcomes identified in the Local Board Plan:

Outcome 5: Cultural heritage and Maori identity is expressed in our communities

• Enable our people to engage with local history and share their cultures

• Build and maintain mutually beneficial relationships with Māori

Outcome 6: A sense of belonging and strong community participation

• Our people are supported to actively contribute to their community and the places they live.

• Support community-led arts and local events that bring people together to meet each other and have fun at no or low cost.

• Our community support agencies, resident groups and marae are supported to coordinate or deliver a

• Range of community wellbeing and resilience services and participation.

8. The non-contestable grant round opened for applications on 12 July 2021 and closed on 21 August 2021. Targeted community organisations were invited to submit an expression of interest application.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The aim of the Franklin Strategic Partnership Grants programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the Local Board Plan. All applications will be assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report recommendations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

10. The local board grants programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups with projects that support community climate change action. Local board grants can contribute to climate action through the support of projects that address food production and food waste, alternative transport methods, community energy efficiency education and behaviour change, build community resilience, and support tree planting.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

11. During work programme development and implementation staff collaborate to ensure a coordinated approach, best utilisation of budgets available and a shared commitment to the outcomes and successes of local board programmes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

12. The local board is responsible for the allocation of the Franklin Strategic Partnerships Grant

13. The aim of the Strategic Partnerships Grant is to support local community groups and organisations to build capacity and capability; upskill staff and volunteers so that the entity becomes more sustainable; and be able to leverage the investment and attract diverse funding opportunities to achieve outcomes identified in the Local Board Plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

14. The Franklin Strategic Partnerships Grant aims to respond to council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to local community groups and organisations who deliver positive outcomes for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

15. Applications were invited from 12 July 2021 to 21 August 2021. Fifteen applications were received (Attachment A) and assessed by a panel of staff for alignment to the criteria outlined in the Franklin Strategic Partnership Grants 2021/2022 framework (Attachment B).

16. A total of $175,000.00 was allocated in principle to fifteen projects in the financial year 2022/2023.

17. Franklin Integration Project Reference Group (Application FPG22-103) was approved funding in principle of $8,000 to use in financial year 2022/2023 towards the Franklin Positive Ageing Expo in October 2022. The group has decided to cancel the event due to Covid restrictions and will not be uplifting this grant. They will reconvene in April 2023 to discuss running the event in October 2023.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

18. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Franklin Strategic Partnership Grants 2021/2022. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

19. Following the Franklin Local Board allocating funding for Franklin Strategic Partnerships Grants, staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	2021/2022 Franklin Partnership Grant Application Summary (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	2021/2022 Franklin Grants Programme	29

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Rikka Barbosa - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Pierre Fourie - Grants & Incentives Manager

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Temporary changes to landowner approval process for filming activities

File No.: CP2022/11830

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt a 12-month pilot programme where landowner approvals for filming permits (with low and medium impacts) are assessed by staff, without the need for consultation with the local board.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is the film office responsible for attracting, advocating for, and facilitating filming activities across the Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland region. The approval process for filming permits is guided by the:

· Auckland Film Protocol (2019) (Attachment A)

· Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022

· Local Board General Delegation to the Chief Executive and Delegation Protocols (2013).

3. As local boards are responsible for activities that take place on parks and other local facilities, they have a limited involvement in the film permitting process through the landowner approval process.

4. All 21 local boards have delegated the responsibility for making landowner approval decisions to Auckland Council staff. This delegation is subject to a requirement for consultation that means that for every landowner approval application – except for low and medium impact event applications – staff must consult the local board’s dedicated lead when making landowner approval decisions. In addition, the local board can “call in” a landowner approval delegation if it wishes to make that decision itself.

Due to an increase in permit applications, Screen Auckland is also seeking this process change to support Auckland’s economic recovery from COVID 19, by enabling a smoother permitting process which will attract more international screen production business, and also improve Auckland’s ‘film friendliness’. This streamlined process will also reduce workloads and increase wellbeing for staff at the frontline of the permit application process.

5. Screen Auckland recommends a 12-month pilot programme that removes the requirement for local board consultation on film permits of low and medium impact. Local boards would still be consulted for high and major impact filming activities and would continue to be notified of all applications. A “call in” would be used only after first discussing options with Screen Auckland staff.

6. The risk of change in quality of permit application decisions is low, as staff already rigorously apply the requirements of the Auckland Film Protocol and the Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022.

7. If approved, the pilot programme would begin Monday, 19 September 2022, and staff would report to the local board quarterly on permit and revenue numbers.

8. After 12 months, Screen Auckland will work collaboratively with local boards and Community Facilities staff to identify potential improvements to the pilot programme and assess a desire to continue.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) agree to waive the requirement (in the Local Board Delegation Protocols) for staff consultation with the local board on landowner approvals, for low and medium impact film shoot permit applications, for a 12-month period.

b) agree that Screen Auckland notifies the local board film lead of all low and medium impact film permits granted in local parks and facilities, ahead of these activities taking place.

c) agree that Screen Auckland continues to work with Community Facilities staff in assessing and determining conditions for the use of local parks and facilities, where appropriate, for all film shoot permit applications.

d) agree to provide a list of sensitive locations with particular escalation points that might elevate an application out of the minor category, or require further discussion, to Screen Auckland before 19 September 2022. Please note, this list of specific locations with potential issues will continue to be assessed during the pilot, and only a priority list rather than a definitive list is required by this date. Fatigued locations and particular escalation points can be updated over the course of the pilot programme.

Horopaki

Context

Permit approval process

9. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is the film office for Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland and is responsible for:

· Attraction – Developing Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland as a film-friendly region and attracting international productions, stimulating regional economies, employment and cultural life

· Advocacy – Supporting local screen businesses to grow and develop in the region while supporting decision makers to protect the interests and safety of mana whenua businesses, residents and the environment

· Facilitation – Streamlining the permit process for filming activities in open public spaces such as parks, beaches and reserves.

10. The process for film approvals is currently controlled by:

Local Board Delegation to the Chief Executive (2013)

· Must receive landowner approval when filming is on a park or in a local facility

· Must consult with local boards where landowner approval is required

· Must refer the landowner consent decision to the local board where required

· That land owner approvals for film permits can be administered by Community Facilities staff without the requirement to consult with local board film representatives

Auckland Film Protocol (2019)

· Film facilitator issues the Application Summary document, summarising the information supplied by the filmmaker to the appropriate council local board(s) and external stakeholders for consideration.

Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw (2022)

· Minimises public safety risks, nuisance and misuse of council-controlled public places by enabling council to prescribe conditions and requirements in relation to all filming.

11. Screen Auckland follows a rigorous process when reviewing applications and considers all applicable national and local legislation. It also liaises directly with the wider Auckland Council family and other decision makers, in the approval process – such as: mana whenua groups, Tūpuna Maunga Authority, Auckland Transport, Environment and Biodiversity, Regional Parks, Sports Parks, Closed Landfills and Heritage.

Pressure due to film sector growth

12. A record-breaking number of film permit applications received by Screen Auckland is putting pressure on workloads and the tight turnaround requirements of the screen sector.

13. The projected increase in application numbers will require efficiencies to be implemented in the application process, to support reducing workloads and time pressures while maintaining ‘film friendliness’.

Auckland Council’s commitment to film friendliness (ratified by the Environment and Community committee as ENV/2019/152) was instituted to improve positive experiences in terms of administration and bureaucracy for film permit applications, to help retain screen productions in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland instead of them choosing to shoot in other parts of the country, or even the world. Screen Auckland would like to build on our reputation of ‘film friendliness’ to future proof these production pipelines

14. There is an urgent need to help revitalise Auckland’s economy due to the impacts of COVID-19, through supporting good experiences within, and return business from the screen sector, which contributes significant value to Auckland’s economy.

Different categories of film applications

15. The impacts table for the different film permit categories can be found on page 14 of the Auckland Film Protocol 2019 document in the supplied attachments.

16. To encourage economic activity, the Auckland Film Protocol and the Public Trading Events and Filming Bylaw 2022, provide detailed guidance and purposefully seek to enable filming where there is negligible impact on public facilities – i.e. low and medium impact categories, also known as Minor Categories. Being able to reflect this ‘film-friendly’ intention in our administration processes, supports the intention of this regional policy.

17. In addition to considerations on impact scale, local boards can also advise Screen Auckland of any specific location-based areas that staff should consider when processing permit applications, such as ecologically sensitive areas. These are added to Screen Auckland’s film permit processing software system, FilmApp, for the future reference of Screen Auckland facilitators.

Consistency with approach to other permits

18. This pilot programme will be consistent with other land-owner approval processes for regulatory activities. For example, in the permitting process for events, local board protocols do not require consultation with the local board for minor category events.

19. Events and filming are both regulated under the Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022. By providing an approval process for film permits that is consistent with events, it allows Council to be more efficient and enabling in these customer-facing processes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Pilot to provide efficient process

20. To create a more efficient permit process, Screen Auckland recommends a 12-month pilot programme where landowner approvals for filming permits with low and medium impacts are decided by staff as per their existing delegation, without the need for consultation with the local board.

21. This pilot will involve four local boards. The intention is to demonstrate that efficiencies can be gained from delegating these low risk activities, without compromising the protection of parks and facilities.

22. As efficiencies are demonstrated over the pilot period, other local boards will be invited to join this streamlined process.

23. If the pilot proves to be efficient and without significant detriment to mana whenua, local boards, businesses, residents or the environment, then Screen Auckland will seek the endorsement of participating local boards, to institute this as a permanent process.

24. There is also the added benefit that removing the consultation requirement will reduce the time and resource involved with local board members monitoring delegated approvals.

Details of the pilot programme

25. Landowner approvals for high and major impact film shoots will still go to local board film representatives for consultation. Local boards will be notified of all applications in advance so that they are aware of activities happening in the facilities that they govern.

26. The measurements for success would include:

· an increased number of same-day-turnaround film applications

· positive feedback from the screen sector if it is enjoying the streamlined approach

· no significant rise in complaints or negative feedback from mana whenua, businesses, residents or environmental groups

· local board film representatives describing a lighter workload following the establishment of the new process.

27. More details of the pilot programme can be found in the attached PowerPoint document.

Review of the pilot programme

28. Screen Auckland will assess the pilot programme collaboratively with Community Facilities staff and local board film leads. It will review comments and complaints as well as positive feedback from mana whenua, businesses, residents, screen sector applicants and local groups. Screen Auckland will provide this feedback to each local board every three months. Data will be kept on the number of permits applied for and issued in the local board area. This data will be compiled and presented for review after 12 months from the date of the first implementation.

29. If the review of the streamlined process is favourable, Screen Auckland will recommend that the process be instituted across all local boards permanently, to ensure consistency in the way that Screen Auckland handles minor category film applications.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30. As this is a change in internal delegation processes, there are no impacts on the climate, however the screen sector does take improving climate impacts and sustainability seriously. Screen Auckland is working with the screen sector to identify ways it can help contribute to a more sustainable Aotearoa. The New Zealand Screen Sector Emissions Study, produced by Screen Auckland in partnership with Arup, seeks to understand the climate impacts of the sector so together, we can map out a transition to sustainability.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. Screen Auckland, part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, is proposing the pilot programme as it:

· reduces the administration time and workload involved in processing and approving film permit applications.

32. Increases Auckland’s ‘film friendliness’ in line with the Auckland Film Protocol 2019, endorsed by Auckland Council’s Environment and Community Committee ENV/2019/152.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. Screen Auckland workshopped streamlining the facilitation process for film applications in the minor categories (Attachment B) with the local board on Tuesday, 26 July 2022.

34. At the workshop, the Henderson Massey Local Board signalled general support for the pilot programme.

35. Concerns from the Henderson Massey Local Board included the ability to identify early any popular or overly used filming spots. The Auckland Film Protocol does note that filming is typically restricted to weekdays in high use parks and reserves. Staff will ensure these situations can be better managed by noting which parks and reserves have high demand at certain times of the year into the Screen Auckland FilmApp permit system so that these can be flagged at the time of application. Screen Auckland will require local boards to notify it of high demand locations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. The existing permit system requires consultation with mana whenua on sites identified in Auckland Unitary Plan section D21, Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua, as well as Tūpuna Maunga Authority spaces. The pilot programme is not changing this requirement to engage with Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

37. Other than minor increases in film permit revenue for local boards, and the additional economic growth that comes with more film productions shooting in local board areas, there are no financial risks or implications that Screen Auckland has identified.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. Screen Auckland film facilitators work closely with the Auckland Council family and other decision makers in rigorously applying the Auckland Film Protocol 2019, The Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 as well as the Local Board Protocol 2013 when assessing film permit applications, to mitigate risks to businesses, residents and the environment.

39. The local board film lead will still have oversight of all applications, so a risk increase is very unlikely. The only thing that is changing is that this process will shift from a consultation with a local board film representative to a notification. All information will still be supplied.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. If approved, the pilot programme will begin on Monday, 19 September 2022.

41. Local boards will be notified of all applications that are approved and consulted on only high and major impact category film applications.

42. At the start of the pilot, Screen Auckland will email local board film leads and Community Facilities staff, inviting them to identify a list of sensitive locations and escalation points. Once these have been discussed and entered into the Screen Auckland permit system, they can be reviewed at the quarterly check ins. If there are any further additions to the list, these can be added and discussed with the Relationship Facilitator – Film, or the Screen Auckland facilitation team lead at any time.

43. After the 12-month pilot, Screen Auckland will review with the local board’s film lead and provide data on complaints, permit approval numbers and other feedback. If there is no significant detriment identified, Screen Auckland will recommend it institutes this streamlined permit process across all local boards permanently, to ensure consistency in the way that Screen Auckland handles minor category film applications.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Matthew Donaldson – Relationship Facilitator - Film

Authorisers

Jesse Joseph – Screen Facilitation Manager

Matthew Horrocks - Contractor

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Adoption of the refreshed Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

File No.: CP2022/11651

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the refresh of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan to provide strategic guidance on the provision of the local sporting facilities network.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 22 June 2021 Franklin Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services work programme 2021/2022 including Item 6:

Activity Name: Implementation of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

Activity Description: Provide grants to groups providing facilities which are identified as a high, medium-high or medium priority in the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan. Review the priority projects every 3-4 years [FR/2021/90].

3. On 14 December 2021, the local board resolved to amend the 2021/2022 implementation activity description to include a refresh of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan [FR/2021/183].

4. Following extensive community consultation and the analysis of findings, a full range of capital developments, repair and maintenance, and spatial/master planning projects were prioritised.

5. The refreshed plan provides a framework for investment, advocacy, and decision-making across the local sporting infrastructure network relative to facilities of varying scale and of varying ownership models.

6. Implementation of the plan will encompass:

a) direct investment through grants to community-owned facility projects (LDI opex)

b) quality advice to support asset-based work programme decisions and resource allocation (LDI capex, renewals, growth funding)

c) quality advice to support advocacy, leverage, and partnership opportunities

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopt the refresh of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan in Attachment A to provide strategic guidance on the provision of the local sporting facilities network including annual implementation by way of:

i) direct investment through grants to community-owned facility projects (LDI opex)

ii) quality advice to support asset-based work programme decisions and resource allocation (LDI capex, renewals, growth funding)

iii) quality advice to support advocacy, leverage, and partnership opportunities

Horopaki

Context

Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plans

7. Sport and active recreation facilities plans provide strategic guidance to inform decision-making regarding investment, advocacy, partnerships, and opportunities within the sport and recreation facility network.

8. The Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan outlines the current network of sport and active recreation facilities across Franklin (irrespective of ownership) and identifies existing and future provision challenges and needs.

9. Key outputs from the plan include:

· consolidated inventory of sport and active recreation facilities

· themes and trends of local facility needs and issues

· assessment of potential impacts of demographic and infrastructure changes

· identification of gaps in facility provision against current and future needs

· framework for prioritising additional projects/potential opportunities for further analysis and assessment

· prioritised list of projects/opportunities to provide clear direction to support advocacy, resource allocation and leasing decisions

Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan 2016

10. The current Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan was adopted in August 2016 [FR/2016/153] with a further priority project refresh adopted in March 2019 [FR/2019/30].

11. The plan has helped to contribute and advocate for more than $800,000 to be invested into local provision (planning, development, and operations). The investment has been instrumental in maintaining, enhancing, and activating facilities for Franklin residents. Investment has been allocated to a wide range of codes/activities, servicing both Franklin and beyond.

12. Franklin Local Board allocated $150,000 from the 2021/2022 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget for implementation of the current plan [FR/2021/90].

Development of the refreshed plan

13. On 22 June 2021 Franklin Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services work programme 2021/2022 including item 6:

Activity Name: Implementation of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan

14. On 14 December 2021, the local board resolved to amend the 2021/2022 implementation activity description to include a refresh of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan [FR/2021/183].

15. A project steering group was setup to provide a holistic lens on refresh of the plan. The group consisted of staff from Local Board Services, Community Facilities, and Parks, Sport and Recreation, complemented by mana whenua representatives and CLM Community Sport.

16. Staff made direct contact with mana whenua with a recognised interest in and around the Franklin Local Board rohe.

17. Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki were actively involved in the refresh of the plan, ensuring key concepts of significance to mana whenua were captured within the kaupapa.

18. An engagement plan was developed guiding the process for an extensive community consultation phase which was administered in collaboration with CLM Community Sport.

19. Information summarised within the plan was collected using a mix of web survey, direct consultation, and secondary data review methodologies.

20. The online survey was distributed to more than 180 known sport and active recreation organisations, a specific school survey was developed for all primary and secondary schools and meetings were held with various relevant facility operators, partners, and facility proponents.

Scope

21. On 14 December 2021 Franklin Local Board adopted the full facilities network scope for the refresh of the plan [FR/2021/183].

22. The scope adopted is detailed below in relation to three subsections:

Geographic area

The refresh will focus on facilities within the Franklin Local Board area whilst also considering participation trends for sub-regional facilities and neighbouring communities.

Type of activity

The refresh will address sport and active recreation as defined in Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039. The provision of ‘play’ will not be specifically addressed however findings will complement existing strategic council plans and policies.

Facility model

The refresh will examine sport and active recreation facilities of varying ownership and operational models, including, but not limited to:

· council land: council owned and operated facilities

· council land: council owned facilities; community operated facilities

· council land: community owned and operated facilities

· Ministry of Education owned and operated facilities

· council owned community facilities with potential for sport and active recreation

· facilities of cultural significance providing community outcomes

· places of worship and education providers where there is community access

· privately or commercially owned and operated facilities where there is community access.

23. The refreshed plan, guided by the adopted scope, illustrates the large variety of facility types which are owned by a range of providers including but not limited to council, private, Ministry of Education, clubs, and charitable trusts.

Franklin Local Board - Customer and Community Services Work Programme 2022/2023

24. On 28 June 2022 Franklin Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services Work Programme 2022/2023 including Item number 2:

Activity Name: Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan implementation

Activity Description: Support priority projects identified within the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan. Assess implementation options for funding based on criteria adopted as part of the 2022/2023 plan refresh [FR/2022/92].

25. This item has $150,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget allocated for 2022/2023 with a further $150,000 indicatively for outer years.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Outcomes of the refresh: Uniquely Franklin

26. The Franklin sport and active recreation facility network faces multiple challenges and opportunities – those that are common across the sector and wider Auckland region, and those uniquely Franklin focused.

27. The refreshed plan identifies opportunities, uniqueness, and challenges specific to Franklin including:

· population distribution and changing demographics

· maintenance of assets, sustainability, and service levels

· collaboration for collective success

· changing participation preferences

· open space network and natural landscape

Key findings

28. General findings of the refreshed plan include the need to retain community access to local school facilities, monitor and review existing facility utilisation and support for the facilities and natural environments that are unique to Franklin and critical to broader regional provision.

29. A summary of findings categorised by facility type can be found in the table below:

Table 1: Key findings by facility type

Type of facility	Overview and key finding
Sports field facilities	· 22 parks accounting for the equivalent of 64.75 full-fields including 51 floodlit with 16% of all fields being sand-based · Field provision is supported by community access to four private or school-owned sites There is a high shortfall of sports fields across Franklin based on strong demand and utilisation relative to current supply. There is an extremely low proportion of sand-based fields in Franklin which impacts capacity levels, quality of surface and overall experience (i.e. poor drainage impacting play or ground closures).
Indoor sport facilities	· 10.25 indoor courts of which half are school based, seven squash courts, one gymnastics facility · Overall limited weekday capacity however weekend capacity exists There is a clear current and forecast shortfall of indoor courts to meet community need. Maintaining existing community access to indoor court provision within the school network is critical for the area.
Outdoor/covered courts	· 86 tennis courts, 41 netball courts including 21 across the two netball centres, 18 basketball courts, two futsal courts and one volleyball court · Seven responding schools provided community access equating to 18 courts; four schools expressed an interest in more community access to their facilities Overall, there appears to be sufficient capacity across the network of outdoor courts. However, the quality, type and location of public courts should be reviewed to ensure they are meeting community needs. Covered court opportunities should be explored to help alleviate capacity constraints experienced with indoor court provision. Optimise existing assets and use available capacity.
Bowling greens, croquet & golf	· 14 bowling greens across 11 sites, five croquet lawns, seven golf courses of which three are on council-owned land · Partnerships with other providers such as rest homes, may offer opportunities to maintain participation levels and reduce operational expense There appears to be a growing interest for all-weather facilities across bowls and golf. The ability to offer access all-year and through all conditions is having a positive impact on participation outcomes. All but one bowling club, indicated their membership was declining or fluctuating in recent years. The one exception is the Pukekohe Cosmopolitan Club which provides an indoor bowls facility.
Water-related facilities	· Six aquatic facilities, one surf lifesaving club, ten boat clubs, three school pools · Noticeable growth in rangatahi participation in waka ama, community access to primary school pools providing critical provision for tamariki With direct access to the Tasman Sea, Manukau Harbour, Hauraki Gulf and Firth of Thames, there is a dispersed network of clubs and water access provision across Franklin. Both outdoor seasonal public pools are aging and need attention to remain fit-for-purpose and attractive.
Wheel-based facilities	· Seven skateparks, four mountain bike trails, two BMX tracks, no formalised learn to ride facilities · Gaps in provision for high forecast growth areas, some sites require upgrades to remain fit-for-purpose Franklin’s natural topography and forests provide quality trail destinations for residents and the wider Auckland population. Changing activity preferences since the COVID pandemic has seen more outdoor-related trail demand which is impacting capacity levels and straining supporting infrastructure.
Equine-related facilities	· 16 equine facilities including ten of private land and asset ownership · Predominantly summertime activity, high youth participation, stable membership Most of the equine-related land and facilities are concentrated in the northern reaches of the Franklin Local Board (particularly around Clevedon and Ardmore), with pockets of land on the outskirts of Pukekohe and down into the Waikato District Council. With its large rural setting and land use for equine-related activities Franklin plays a critical role in land provision and facilities to service Tāmaki Makaurau.
Outdoor exercise facilities	· Six fitness stations of varying quality and functionality located across Franklin · Trails network integral for preserving and harnessing the natural landscape, connecting communities, and activating sport and active recreation sites There are numerous formed walking paths (Auckland Council-owned and maintained) that are available in Franklin. They are primarily located to accentuate and showcase the natural landscape of the area. There is a strong desire within the community, crown and council agencies and mana whenua to deliver green trails throughout Franklin.
Other facilities	· Array of bespoke assets including seven target facilities, five archery sites, three air-related facilities, 22 ‘other indoor facilities’ · Broad range of school and community facilities used to accommodate activities such as martial arts, indoor bowls, and table tennis With its vast rural spaces, Franklin accommodates a range of target facilities which need large land parcels and distance from residential areas (noise pollution and safety). Forest land is attractive for archery groups, while the natural landscape is integral for facilitating hang-gliding and paragliding activity.

Priority projects

30. Following extensive community consultation and the analysis of findings, a full range of capital developments, repair and maintenance, and spatial/master planning projects were prioritised.

31. In total more than 50 projects were independently assessed and categorised by priority before being listed alphabetically.

32. The priority projects list offers an independent evaluation of prioritised local need at a single moment in time, interpretation of the list should be supported by present-day quality advice.

33. The list should be considered a live list with scope for projects/opportunities to move up, down or be added or removed to the list following an assessment process as outlined within the plan.

Assessment - Guiding principles

34. Priority projects identified through the community consultation phase have been assessed using four guiding principles, derived from Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 and supported by a series of components from The New Zealand Sporting Facilities Framework.

· Equity

· Outcome focused

· Achievability

· Sustainability

Table 2: High priority projects – Snapshot

Group or site	High priority project or opportunity
Bledisloe Park	Development of indoor/covered cricket training facility
Clarks Beach Recreation Reserve	Implementation of concept plan
Colin Lawrie Fields	Field upgrades (rugby and softball)
Court and surface renewal	Condition assessment of courts network
Franklin Gymsports	Progress relocation and rebuild project
Franklin indoor/covered courts	Network provision investigation
Pukekohe Indian Association	Options assessment and feasibility investigation
Kariaotahi Surf Club	Three-level club facility development
Massey Park	Clubroom and changing room renovations
Pukekohe skatepark	Investigate new recreation additions
Rosa Birch Park	Development of hockey turf training strip and upgrade of turf #2
Te Puru Park	Development of concept plan
Various sites	Development of trails plan
Waiuku Netball Centre	Court resurfacing and grandstand improvements

35. A detailed list of priority projects can be found within the refreshed plan with supporting rationale, proposed project actions, and indicative costs.

36. The plan provides a framework for analysing additional projects or opportunities which can then be prioritised using a consistent method.

Implementation

37. Franklin Local Board has approved $150,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget for implementation of the plan in 2022/2023 with a further $150,000 per year indicatively for outer years [FR/2022/92].

38. The refreshed plan provides a framework for investment, advocacy, and decision-making across the local sporting infrastructure network relative to facilities of varying scale and of varying ownership models.

39. Implementation of the plan will encompass:

a) direct investment through grants to community-owned facility projects (LDI opex)

b) quality advice to support asset-based work programme decisions and resource allocation (LDI capex, renewals, growth funding)

c) quality advice to support advocacy, leverage, and partnership opportunities

40. An annual grants process will require priority projects to undergo further investigation prior to workshopping with the local board. Staff will engage with mana whenua on a project-by-project basis whereby specific elements align with key considerations identified within the plan.

Auckland Council Sport and Recreation Facilities Investment Fund

41. The plan recognises that whilst the local board plays an integral role in the community sport facilities network, implementation will require a diverse mix of funders through a partnership approach.

42. The Sport and Recreation Facility Investment Fund is a regionally contestable fund that will invest circa $120 million over the next ten years to proactively address sport and recreation infrastructure shortfalls, respond to changing participation preferences, and aim to get more Aucklanders more active, more often.

43. The Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan is designed to guide advocacy and support to leverage regional (council) or external funding for suitably aligned projects.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

44. There was minimal impact on direct greenhouse emissions in the process of refreshing the plan.

45. Community consultation largely consisted of online and phone call methods and where site visits or in-person meetings were necessary these were scheduled to minimise travel requirements.

46. Implementation of the plan will involve annual, targeted investment into priority projects and require the need for detailed analysis (including environmental impact) prior to decision-making and investment from the local board or wider council group.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. The plan aims to provide high-level strategic guidance for mahi across the council group including but not limited to Parks, Sport and Recreation, Community Facilities and Eke Panuku.

48. The project steering group was setup to provide a holistic lens on development of the plan and offered ongoing opportunities to contribute and question throughout the development process.

49. Parks, Sport and Recreation staff will lead the implementation of the plan which will involve collaboration with other departments on an annual basis.

50. The plan contains references to data from across the council group and considers developments broader than sport and active recreation such as transport, housing and major infrastructure projects to provide context.

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. The draft refresh was workshopped with the local board on 5 July 2022 where questions and feedback were provided verbally. There was a secondary window of opportunity for members to feedback on the draft plan in written form following the workshop and staff have since received written feedback on 7 July, 26 July, 5 August and further verbal feedback at a 2 August workshop.

52. Following local board feedback several amendments or additions have been made to the draft refresh. Key changes are outlined below noting this includes feedback from the steering group as well.

Table 3: Key feedback and changes to the draft plan

Topic/item	Change & rationale
Concern population/growth data did not reflect current numbers	Baseline data remains 2018 census as referenced. The demographics title has been updated to indicate figures reflect the 2018 census (not current population). Annual implementation of the plan will consider population trends and subsequent community need in current-state form.
Bledisloe Cricket Training Facility	Indoor training centre project has been elevated to align with strong code support received.
Clevedon Sports Hub	Initial feedback was received from the bowls club who referenced a desire to be part of the hub however no further detail was received. The golf club domiciled at the site of the proposed hub have since provided details of the project which has subsequently been added.
Beachlands Domain	Field and lighting upgrades have been added as a standalone project. This should be considered relative to demand and accessibility to facilities at the nearby Te Puru Park.
Kawakawa Bay Boat Ramp	Demand has been further investigated and the ramp project has been elevated following reassessment.

53. A series of additional minor changes including rewording of specific points were made to align with community insights provided by the local board and steering group.

54. A number of groups did not reply to email or phone correspondence and have therefore only been added to the inventory and may not have specific tailored insights.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55. Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Tamaoho, and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, have collectively played an important role in the development of the draft plan and shaping specific high-level considerations of significance to mana whenua.

56. When looking to progress development projects it is important lead organisations consider a multitude of factors, including but not limited to:

· environmental impact

· sustainable design, construction, and land management practices

· investigation of efficiencies

· incorporation of climate change mitigation and adaption measures

· inclusion of Māori narrative and place names

57. It should be noted projects will be of a varied nature and some or all of the above considerations may not be applicable, however, an underlying principle of kaitiakitanga should be applied wherever possible.

58. It is integral implementation of the plan upholds the values recognised herein and that an ongoing partnership is maintained with mana whenua for the betterment of the Franklin community.

59. A number of marae were contacted directly with insights highlighting that some local marae play a notable role in supporting Māori participation in informal recreation through the provision of fitness gyms and supporting infrastructure.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

60. On 22 June 2021 Franklin Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services work programme 2021/2022 including item 6; Implementation of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan, with an associated budget of $150,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget [FR/2021/90].

61. On 14 December 2021, the local board resolved to amend the 2021/2022 implementation activity description and in-turn approve the subsequent use of budget to refresh of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan [FR/2021/183].

62. On 28 June 2022 Franklin Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services Work Programme 2022/2023 including item 2; Activity Name: Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan implementation. This item has $150,000 Locally Driven Initiatives operational budget allocated for 2022/2023 with a further $150,000 indicatively for outer years [FR/2022/92].

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. There are no significant risks in adopting the refreshed Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan.

64. Public/community group interpretation of the plan may be perceived as a minor risk as explained below.

Table 4: Minor risks and mitigation

Risk

Mitigation

Community sport stakeholders misinterpret the intent of this plan as a funding commitment by Franklin Local Board or Auckland Council

The following statement has been added prior to the priority project list in order to mitigate the risk of misinterpretation:

IMPORTANT: Project prioritisation should not be interpreted as an indication of financial support on behalf of the Franklin Local Board or Auckland Council.

Community sport stakeholders may perceive a project to be inaccurately weighted in terms of priority

All projects have been assessed by an independent panel external to Franklin Local Board and Auckland Council. Priority projects have been assessed using guiding principles derived from Increasing Aucklanders’ Participation in Sport: Investment Plan 2019-2039 and supported by a series of components from The New Zealand Sporting Facilities Framework. The assessment criteria and specific weightings are included within the plan.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

65. Staff will thank key contributors to the refresh of the plan including Te Ākitai Waiohua, Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki as mana whenua representatives, and CLM Community Sport for assisting the consultation phase.

66. Staff will share the final plan with the steering group and key stakeholders within the Franklin sport and recreation sector.

67. Implementation of the plan will be workshopped with the local board in quarter three before a report is presented in to approve grant allocations.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan	53

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kieran Nevey - Sport & Recreation Lead

Authorisers

Mace Ward - General Manager Parks, Sports and Recreation

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Shoreline Adaptation Plan: Beachlands and East pilot

File No.: CP2022/09732

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board endorsement of the Shoreline Adaptation Plan – Beachlands and East Draft Report (Attachment A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Shoreline Adaptation Plans are being developed across Auckland to provide a long-term adaptation strategy for council-owned land and assets in response to the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change (including sea-level rise).

3. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme commenced in February 2021 with the development of the Whangaparāoa pilot. The second pilot, Beachlands and East, launched in October 2021 covering the area from Pine Harbour, Beachlands to Matingarahi at the Auckland regional border (and including both Waharau and Whakatīwai Regional Parks to the south).

4. Community engagement for the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan began in October 2021 and closed on 25 February 2022. It included a range of both digital and in-person engagements and tools to identify community values and objectives to support the development of adaptation strategies.

5. Mana whenua engagement with local iwi (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngaati Whanaunga, Te Ākitai Waiohua and Ngāti Pāoa) started in November 2021. This engagement consisted of a series of online hui to understand the cultural values of the coast. The values of mana whenua involved in this project have served as a core foundation of the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan report.

6. The Beachlands and East coast was divided into 31 discrete coastal sections. By aligning the results of the technical coastal hazards risk assessment with local iwi feedback and infrastructure and community objectives, a series of adaptation strategies were developed across the short, medium, and long-term.

7. Results have demonstrated that most of the Beachlands and East shoreline areas can be managed over the next 100 years with limited to no active intervention.

8. The development of Shoreline Adaptation Plans across the region is funded through the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 as part of the climate action investment package. However, the reports do not commit council to any additional investment and no financial investment decisions have been made through this pilot.

9. The final Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee in September 2022 for approval.

10. Implementation of the adaptation strategies recommended in the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan will require integration into relevant council documents and plans including Asset Management Plans. Alongside monitoring of coastal assets and the surrounding coastal environment, this will help to inform the appropriate maintenance and renewal of assets through a collaborative effort across Auckland Council departments.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) endorse the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan

b) note that the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan provides site-specific adaptive strategies that outline the preferred coastal management response for each site over time

c) note that to implement the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan, adaptive strategies will need to be integrated into relevant Asset Management Plans to inform the maintenance and renewal of assets:

i) where strategies can be implemented through existing budgets, this will be integrated from now

ii) where strategies require additional budget, this will be subject to a regional prioritisation process for funding once all Shoreline Adaptation Plans have been completed.

Horopaki

Context

11. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme is focused on how we can adapt Auckland Council-owned land and assets to the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change over time. The programme is led by the Resilient Land and Coasts department and is developed collaboratively across Auckland Council including Auckland Transport and Watercare.

12. The programme launched in February 2021 with a pilot study across the Whangaparāoa Peninsula. The Whangaparāoa pilot was endorsed by the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board in February 2022 and approved by the Environment and Climate Change Committee in March 2022 (ECC/2022/56).

13. Development of each Shoreline Adaptation Plan to date has included engagement with mana whenua, the local community and infrastructure providers. This has identified values and objectives for shoreline management in each area. In combination with the technical results of a coastal hazards exposure assessment, these objectives are used to determine an appropriate series of shoreline adaptation strategies.

14. The strategies provide high-level guidance on how coastal areas can be adapted over time to sustainably manage the escalating impacts of coastal hazards and climate change. Strategies include:

· No active intervention: allow natural processes and evolution of the coast to continue. This includes no investment in the provision or maintenance of any coastal defences.

· Limited intervention: acknowledges that the coastline’s position will not be fixed into the future and may include limited work to extend existing asset life and small-scale nature-based measures (like dune planting).

· Hold the line: maintain the coastal edge at a fixed location, using nature-based options (like beach nourishment) or hard structures (like sea walls).

· Managed realignment: assets and activities are moved away from hazard-prone areas in a controlled way over time. Managed realignment allows greater space for natural buffers and reduces asset exposure to natural hazards.

15. Coastal stretches identified as hold the line have a strong link to infrastructure and high amenity value. In the long term, managed retreat is required to avoid ongoing erosion pressures and more frequent inundation. This change in high-level management strategy over time provides for a phased and adaptive management approach for coastal assets and infrastructure.

16. The process of developing the Beachlands and East report and resulting recommendations of the Shoreline Adaptation Plan are further discussed below.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17. The Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan is the second of a series of 20 Shoreline Adaptation Plans which will be rolled out across the Auckland Region over the next three to five years.

18. The management strategies presented in the report are described as short, medium or long-term. However, the time at which we will need to change between strategies will not be determined by the year, but by physical or social triggers. The short, medium and long-term periods described in the report are our current best estimates for when these trigger points will be reached.

19. Implementation of the Shoreline Adaptation Plans will be supported by monitoring of coastal assets and the surrounding coastal environment to inform these triggers for changing management strategies. Monitoring will include coastal asset condition assessments, beach level surveys and tracking the rate of future coastal hazards and climate change impacts undertaken through the council. Mana whenua will have the opportunity to lead or be involved in future shoreline monitoring as partners in the Shoreline Adaptation Plan programme.

Beachlands and East coastal hazard risk assessment

20. An assessment of the risk presented to the Beachlands and East frontage by coastal hazards and future climate change impacts was undertaken. This included coastal inundation, coastal erosion, and rainfall flooding across the short (20-year), medium (60-year) and long (100-year) term. The risk assessment methodology was developed as a pilot, expanding on the original coastal hazards exposure assessment previously completed for Whangaparāoa Peninsula.

21. The risk assessment considers the impact of coastal hazards and climate change across the four well-beings defined in section 3 (Purpose) of the Local Government Act:

· social (park and reserve assets)

· economic (public infrastructure)

· environmental (ecological areas)

· cultural (heritage sites).

22. The results of the risk assessment are presented as a series of tables for each hazard, demonstrating the changing risk over time for each of the well-beings considered.

23. The results (refer attachment A clause 4.4) show that there is a varying risk across the Beachlands and East coastline across the four well-beings in the short term. The risks to cultural assets are the highest and social risks to parks and reserves are the lowest.

24. Due to the impacts of climate change (including sea-level rise and increased rainfall intensity), hazard extents and flood depths increase over time, in turn increasing the coastal hazard risk profile.

25. Coastal erosion presents the highest long-term impact on council-owned land and assets (including Maraetai and Kawakawa Bay) because it results in the permanent loss of land.

26. For coastal inundation, risks notably increase over time with sea-level rise for parks and reserve land in Beachlands, and for economic infrastructure, such as roading and Watercare assets, at Maraetai and Kawakawa Bay.

27. The risk assessment results were used to inform discussions of the changing coastal environment with:

· local iwi

· infrastructure providers (Community Facilities, Healthy Waters, Auckland Transport and Watercare)

· amenity and open space specialists (Parks, Sports and Recreation, Community Facilities)

· the local community.

28. An understanding of changing risk over time has provided the technical basis to determining and changing high-level adaptation strategies along the coast.

Community engagement – local input to local issues

29. Community engagement commenced in October 2021 and closed on 25 February 2022. The engagement was extended from the original 11February close date to enable further feedback from the community.

30. In response to changing COVID-19 restrictions, a combination of approaches to community engagement were applied, including:

· Two online webinars that were livestreamed and uploaded to Auckland Council’s YouTube channel for future reference. The webinars introduced the shoreline adaptation plan work programme and key concepts including coastal hazards, climate change and adaptation options.

· Two public community engagement days hosted at Clevedon Markets and Sunkist Bay to promote the opportunity to provide feedback and to raise awareness of coastal change.

· Two online public events replaced scheduled in person events at Maraetai Beach and Waitawa Regional Park due to COVID-19 restrictions. The events were run on a public Zoom drop-in platform to enable live questions and answers.

· Digital engagement through ‘AK Have Your Say’ and ‘Social Pinpoint’. The latter enabled the community to access an online interactive map to drop ‘pins’ identifying and commenting on areas they valued, and complete short surveys for specific areas.

· Three Wairoa clinic online forum events which focused on introducing the project, providing insight into the proposed community objectives, and updating on the final draft report.

31. The Social Pinpoint map was open for feedback throughout the engagement period, receiving submissions from almost 400 unique users. Community feedback from the ‘AK Have Your Say’ page included 26 survey submissions, and 22 specific questions were submitted.

32. All feedback was collated and sorted into the following major categories: active recreation, passive recreation, environment, transport, community connection, coastal engineering and asset maintenance and management issues. Comments related to these categories have been used to develop the high-level community objectives for the Shoreline Adaptation Plan. These objectives were used to guide the development of the adaptation strategies and are as follows:

· resilience of assets in hazard zones is considered a priority in asset management decision-making to support service provision and ensure disruption is limited

· provide safe access with parking to the coast for a range of water-based activities at a range of tide levels (including swimming, sailing/boating, kiteboarding, and surfing)

· identify existing locations for motorised boat launching where improvements will provide the greatest benefit to the wider network

· enhance opportunities for pedestrian and cycling movements along the coastline, integrated with the existing coastal walking, and cycling experience throughout the Beachlands and East setting

· have accessible places within coastal reserves where people can enjoy the environment in its natural setting

· in the short term, work with Auckland Emergency Management to develop a community resilience network across Beachlands and East

· preserve and enhance the natural environment and ecosystems and support biodiversity

· work with Auckland Transport to develop a resilient road network for the area, which supports increased access for a diverse range of transport type and coastal access for recreation.

Adaptation strategies developed collaboratively

33. The Beachlands and East coastline has been divided into 31 discrete coastal sections, defined by the driving coastal processes and geomorphology. By aligning the results of the risk assessment with local iwi feedback, infrastructure and community objectives, a series of adaptation strategies were developed across the short, medium, and long-term.

34. Attachment B shows the proposed adaptation strategies for each section of coastline and shows how they change over time. It shows that most areas of the Beachlands and East Shoreline can be managed over the next 100 years with limited to no active intervention.

35. Coastal stretches identified as ‘hold the line’ have either a strong link to infrastructure, high amenity value or have limited space to provide for alternative management options. These include areas such as:

· Pine Harbour – recognising the area as a key transport hub and the need to maintain access to the foreshore

· Sunkist Bay – retain access to the coast at this high amenity reserve. Because of increasing inundation risk there will be a requirement to move assets that are not related to coastal defence out of reclaimed areas, most likely when they are renewed.

36. In the long term (50 years and onwards), an increasing proportion of the coast requires managed retreat to avoid ongoing erosion pressure and more frequent inundation (specifically Maraetai Beach, Umupuia and Kawakawa Bay). This strategy does not signal abandonment of ‘at risk’ areas but identifies a process to reduce maintenance and renewals costs by moving council assets out of exposed areas to accommodate natural coastal processes and build a more resilient shoreline. Overall, the changing management strategies reflect the increasing risk over time but provides for a phased and adaptive management approach for assets and infrastructure located in the coastal hazards area.

37. Areas of importance either due to their landscape or heritage value have also been considered. However, a separate adaptation plan for managing the shoreline response for cultural heritage sites may be required as part of a wider cultural heritage plan.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme is funded as part of the 10-year Budget climate action investment package and is a core climate adaptation workstream. As global temperatures rise, Auckland is predicted to experience between 0.6 and 1.5 metres of sea level rise by 2130, dependent on the future carbon dioxide emissions scenario. The impacts of climate change and sea-level rise are expected to increase the frequency, intensity and magnitude of natural hazards including coastal erosion, coastal inundation, and rainfall flooding.

39. Shoreline Adaptation Plans will help reduce asset exposure and signal the need to work with nature. In many cases this may involve developing natural systems (such as wide beaches, well vegetated dunes, and tidal marshes) that can help buffer the impacts of climate change.

40. Shoreline Adaptation Plans also assist in educating the public about the impacts of climate change and the need to adapt. Building awareness and signalling the need to be prepared for coastal hazard events is an important part of long-term resilience. For that reason, Shoreline Adaptation Plans report under the Community and Coast priority area of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

41. The Beachlands and East report (Attachment A) outlines how Auckland Council-owned land and assets in the shoreline area can be managed to mitigate the impacts of coastal hazards and climate change. Implementation of the plan will increase the resilience of Auckland by decreasing the number of assets in the hazard zones over time. The implementation of the plan will also support the development of natural systems that can act as a future buffer.

42. Greenhouse gas emissions are not considered within the report, which focuses on the strategic goal of adapting the shoreline to build long-term resilience. Emissions reduction should be addressed at the options assessment stages when implementing the results of this plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

43. Considering the broad extent of council-owned coastal land and assets and the non-statutory nature of the Shoreline Adaptation Plans, implementation of the plan will be a collaborative effort across Auckland Council departments. The project team has worked in partnership with relevant departments and council-controlled organisations to co-develop the Beachlands and East report.

44. Strategies will be given effect to and integrated into all relevant council plans and documents including Reserve Management Plans, Regional Parks Management Plans, Open Space Network Plans and Asset Management Plans. Together, this will cascade through to support associated decision making (such as landowner and leasehold approvals).

45. Adaptation strategies will be integrated into all relevant council strategic and Asset Management Plans to inform appropriate outcomes in the maintenance and renewals work programmes. For example, management of Community Facilities assets that provide a coastal defence or amenity function will be considered through council’s Coastal Assets Renewals Programme. This programme is managed through the Resilient Land and Coasts department who facilitate site-specific assessments of coastal processes, option feasibility and costings, to identify preferred solutions that will align with the overarching adaptation strategies identified in the Shoreline Adaptation Plan.

46. Watercare and Auckland Transport were involved in the development of the Beachlands and East Plan and provided insight into infrastructure considerations around the coastline. These considerations were taken into account in the selection of adaptation strategies.

47. In addition to the high-level coastal adaptation strategies identified in the plan, a strategic network assessment of coastal access points and recreational water access is recommended be undertaken, as covered in point 44 above, for the Beachlands and East coastline.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. A workshop was held in mid-2021 with the Franklin Local Board to introduce the Shoreline Adaptation Plan process and the need to adapt. A second workshop summarising the full Shoreline Adaptation Plan development process and outlining the results was given on 26 June 2022.

49. The local board has supported the development of the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan throughout the community engagement period. The local board chair opened the first Beachlands and East webinar in November 2021. Other local board members attended the community engagement days including Clevedon Markets, Sunkist Bay, and the Wairoa Clinic sessions.

50. Community objectives were considered and are reflected in the development of the adaptation strategies and will inform future projects in the shoreline area including coastal local board and renewals work programmes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

43. The Shoreline Adaptation Plans programme is designed in the spirit of partnership with mana whenua and the project team meets regularly with the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Kaitiaki forum.

44. Local iwi Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngaati Whanaunga, Te Ākitai Waiohua and Ngāti Pāoa partnered in the development of the Beachlands and East plan.

45. Between November 2021 and June 2022, over 10 hui with local iwi were undertaken to understand the cultural values of the Beachlands and East coastline. During these hui, iwi provided cultural context to the coastline and advocated specific themes related to shoreline management as well acknowledging and advocating for three key principles:

· the importance of recognising the autonomy of each iwi / hapū

· protection of the knowledge (mātauranga) and how this is shared

· naming of each iwi who have been involved in the development of the plan.

46. The themes and objectives gifted by mana whenua informed the development of the adaptation strategies and are a core foundation of the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan report.

47. To further honour themes advocated for in the report, we have recommended that all future shoreline projects on the coastline:

· value whakapapa (ancestry) by acknowledging and supporting the cultural and spiritual values of mana whenua and giving effect to the views of mana whenua regarding culturally significant sites or areas in any coastal management or engineering options

· value taiao (environment) by prioritising naturalisation of the shoreline and working to enhance and protect the natural environment. This includes restoration of the natural environment in areas where managed realignment has been recommended and considering nature-based options in areas of hold the line

· value tangata hononga (connecting people) by recognising and supporting the interdependence of people and their environment, providing mana whenua with kaitiaki opportunities, and working with the local community on volunteering opportunities.

50. Information on how the Shoreline Adaptation Plan aligns with Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau has been included as a section in the Beachlands and East report (Attachment A). Te Ora ō Tāmaki Makaurau is the wellbeing framework developed by the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum in response to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri, and Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, the Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework adopted by Auckland Council in 2021.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

51. Delivery of the Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme is regionally funded through the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 climate action investment package. No additional funding is sought from local boards to deliver the reports.

52. Mitigating coastal hazards will become increasingly expensive for Auckland and wider New Zealand. It will not be affordable or feasible to defend everywhere. Shoreline Adaptation Plans, like Beachlands and East, will ensure that shoreline projects consider the escalating future risk of climate change and respond in both an environmentally and economically sustainable manner.

53. No financial investment decisions have been made through the Beachlands and East report. The adaptation strategies of the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan will be given effect to across relevant council decision-making. This includes the future management, maintenance and renewal of council assets and land located along the coast through existing work programmes and associated budgets. Over time, this will result in cost savings as assets are moved out of coastal hazard areas and incur less damage due to coastal erosion and flooding.

54. Once all Shoreline Adaptation Plans across Auckland are completed, a regional funding prioritisation schema will be developed. The framework and process for undertaking this exercise will need to be agreed with the Governing Body. This will assist in budgetary requirements for areas where managed realignment or other major coastal works has been recommended.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

55. Without strategic guidance, coastal asset decisions are at risk of being made on an ad-hoc basis and may not adequately consider the escalating risk of climate change. The Shoreline Adaptation Plan provides the strategic long-term vision for Beachlands and East coastal areas. Implementation of the plan will require multiple departments across council to continue to work together.

56. As multiple teams are required to work together to implement the Shoreline Adaptation Plan, there is potential that the plan is not applied across all business areas. To mitigate this, the project team has worked in collaboration with departments across council to develop the plan. In addition, a Coastal Governance Group has also been established to oversee the development and implementation of the Shoreline Adaptation Plan work programme.

57. There is a high level of public interest in the management of the coast, including council-owned land and assets. Potential opposition to the proposed adaptation strategies has been mitigated through the development of the plans in the spirit of partnership with mana whenua, with extensive engagement with the local community, wider public and infrastructure providers.

58. Due to uncertainty in emission reductions, there is a risk that coastal hazards may increase in frequency and intensity earlier than expected. However, the Shoreline Adaptation Plan was developed using a conservative climate change scenario (RCP 8.5 – this refers to the concentration of carbon that delivers global warming at an average of 8.5 watts per square meter across the planet. The RCP 8.5 pathway delivers a temperature increase of about 4.3˚ celsius by 2100, relative to pre-industrial temperatures) in the long term, and we consider this risk to be low.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59. Once the Beachlands and East Shoreline Adaptation Plan has been endorsed by the Franklin Local Board, staff will present the report to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval on 8 September 2022. It will be presented alongside Te Wai Manawa/Little Shoal Bay ‘mini’ Shoreline Adaptation Plan for the Kaipātiki Local Board area.

60. Once approved, the Beachlands and East report will be released to the public and to stakeholders across Auckland Council and the adaptation strategies will be integrated into key council plans for implementation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Kahawairahi ki Whakatiwai - Pilot Beachlands and East (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Overview of adaptation strategies across all 31 stretches of Beachlands and East	165

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Donna Carter - Relationship Advisor

Authorisers

Barry Potter - Director Infrastructure and Environmental Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Auckland Transport bi-monthly report

File No.: CP2022/11497

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the Franklin Local Board on transport related matters.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The purpose of the report is to provide an update on transport related items, including:

· Pukekohe parking issues

· Pukekohe to Papakura bus replacement

· Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

· Pukekohe town centre safety measures

· Cape Hill / Reynolds roads roundabout

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) receive the August 2022 report from Auckland Transport.

Horopaki

Context

3. Auckland Transport (AT) is responsible for all of Auckland’s transport services, excluding state highways. AT reports on a regular basis to local boards, as set out in the Local Board Engagement Plan. This reporting commitment acknowledges the important engagement role local boards play within and on behalf of their local communities.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

4. This section of the report contains information about relevant projects, issues and initiatives. It provides summaries of the detailed advice and analysis provided to the local board during workshops and briefings.

Pukekohe parking issues

5. An update of the Parking Strategy went to Auckland Council’s Planning Committee, where the committee resolved not to progress the strategy before the forthcoming election. In the interim, the project team are reviewing information gathered and preparing for their next phase of engagement.

6. The local board has raised issues relating to disability parking and short term-time restricted parking, as over the last few years, there have been changes in the adjacent business types.

7. AT Parking had a meeting on site with some Franklin Local Board members last month to discuss parking in Pukekohe town centre.

8. Outcomes of this meeting:

· Agreed that some short-term solutions relating to mobility parking will be considered by AT Parking design team

· AT Parking to work with the Local Board and Business Association to help businesses in the town centre develop/refine aspiration around parking

· In the new electoral term AT has agreed to organise a workshop with Local Board and Business Association members to help develop this view.

9. AT is currently awaiting some suggestions around short stay and mobility parking improvements, and we will progress these as soon as practically possible once we receive them.

10. Eke Panuku Development Auckland is also engaging with the local board on a process to review the off-street parking and parking buildings in the town centre. They are leading this and are briefing the local board. A number of AT staff are involved in the project to ensure that interrelated projects are aligned.

Pukekohe to Papakura bus replacement

11. On 13 August 2022, commuter rail services between Pukekohe and Papakura ceased for two years, to enable the electrification of the line. The local board has been briefed on all the aspects of these changes on a number of occasions.

12. The key aspects of the changes are as follows:

· The current 394 bus service now travels from Pukekohe to Papakura via Paerata Rise, with increased frequency and service hours

· The service is free

· Buses will meet trains, and the drivers have been given discretion to ensure this happens

· The initial weeks will be carefully monitored and adjustments made where appropriate.

13. The local board meeting occurs a few days after this new service begins. A verbal update will be given to the local board at the meeting.

Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF)

14. Local board members have been advised by memo, that as a consequence of Governing Body decisions regarding the 2022/23 budget, the Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) was halved from that proposed in the Long Term Plan.

15. AT staff are currently working through the implications of this decision including:

· Stage of the various projects

· What costs are contractually committed?

· Where relevant, what can be progressed at little or no capital expenditure (capex) cost?

· When is construction is likely to commence?

· Where relevant, what are staging options?

16. This information will be provided to the local board at a workshop on Tuesday 16 August. The workshop seeks local board direction to AT staff, so that a report can go to the board’s September meeting for formal resolution in response to the reduced budget and reprioritisation.

Pukekohe town centre safety measures

17. On Monday 8 August AT began consultation on four separate safety improvement projects in the town centre. The combined effect of the measures aim to significantly increase overall safety for all citizens. The projects are:

Proposal 1: Convert existing raised tables into zebra crossings at two intersections

Drivers are already alerted to slow down at these intersections, but now they would have to stop and give way to people waiting and using the zebra crossing. The intersections are:

· Seddon/King/Queen/West Streets

· King and Edinburgh Street

Proposal 2: Installing new raised zebra crossings at two intersections

AT propose to install new raised zebra crossings to improve safety for crossing the road at:

· Edinburgh/Stadium/Tobin Streets

· Edinburgh/Massey/Wesley Streets

Key benefits of pedestrian improvements:

· Improves accessibility and safety for pedestrians

· Slows speed through intersections, making it safe for everyone

· Encourages walking within the community.

Other notes:

· There are no changes to on-street parking

· A construction timeline is still to be planned

Proposal 3: Install new traffic signals at Stadium Drive, East Street

Safety is the primary reason for replacing the current give-way control. The intersection is well-known for safety issues and is supported by Police reports of vehicle crashes and near-misses.

What would change with the new traffic signals at Stadium/East Street?

• Traffic priority will be controlled by the new signals, and East Street traffic will be given dedicated green times to safely exit.

• Signal-controlled pedestrian crossings will be provided across both Stadium Drive and East Street.

• A new footpath will be built on the southern side of Stadium Drive from reshaping the driveway exit and entrance of the corner businesses.

• A new signalised pedestrian crossing on Stadium Drive in front of Z service station (in partnership with Eke Panuku Development Auckland).

• There would be no changes to parking on the street.

Proposal 4: Install traffic signals at the intersection of King Street, Stadium Drive, Massey Avenue and Manukau Road

Optimising people movement and traffic demand is the rationale for replacing the existing roundabout.

What would change with the new traffic lights at King Street, Stadium Drive, Massey Avenue, Manukau Road?

• Removal of the right turn from Stadium Drive into King Street

• Removing the roundabout and traffic priority will be controlled by the new signals

• Signal controlled pedestrian crosswalks will be provided across all four roads

• East Street traffic will not be able to turn right into King Street. Instead, drivers can access the town centre by turning right on to Stadium Drive or straight ahead via Massey Avenue.

• There would be no changes to on-street parking.

18. Prior to formal engagement, discussion were held with nearby stakeholders, though this was impacted by COVID restrictions. As well as media campaigns, drop-in sessions are planned. The local board will be verbally updated at the meeting.

Cape Hill / Reynolds roads roundabout

19. AT recently installed a roundabout on the intersections of Cape Hill and Reynolds roads. Part way through construction, local board members reported issues of drivers, particularly large trucks, running over kerbs and cutting-up berms. The project is now complete and below is an update from AT engineers.

“The roundabout was designed with a mountable apron which allows large vehicles to move through the roundabout without mounting the kerbs and grassed areas. We are aware though that some drivers were unnecessarily tracking over the new kerb while construction was still being completed and before the signage had been installed. Now that construction has been completed, AT will be doing a walkover with the contractor to determine if this behaviour is still occurring and to identify remedial action as necessary.”

20. The local board will be advised of the outcome of the walkover.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. AT 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.

22. AT’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.

23. There is a growing global, national and local need to urgently address the threats posed by climate change through reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The scientific evidence is compelling. In New Zealand the Climate Change Response (Zero-Carbon) Act was enacted in 2019, which requires national GHG emissions to be net-zero by 2050. In June 2019 Auckland Council declared a climate emergency, followed by the endorsement in July 2020 of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

24. Tackling climate change will require a very significant change to the way we travel around our region although the timing and the detail of how this change might unfold are still to become obvious. Auckland Council through the Auckland Climate Plan has committed to a 50 percent reduction in emissions by 2030, the amount required to keep the planet within 1.5°C of warming by 2100.

25. Roughly five percent of Auckland’s road and rail strategic networks are found in areas susceptible to coastal inundation, including parts of the state highway network which are crucial links for freight movements and access to key regional destinations. Over 1,000km (or about 13 percent) of AT’s local road network has recently been identified as vulnerable to a 1-in-100 year flood event. AT is currently identifying and prioritising the risks of climate change to the transport system (assets, services, customers and staff) to permit a more strategic approach to designing and managing our assets in the future.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26. The impact of information (or decisions) in this report are confined to AT and do not impact on other parts of the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27. The purpose of this report is to inform the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

28. There are no impacts specific to Māori for this reporting period. AT is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi - the Treaty of Waitangi, and its broader legal obligations in being more responsive to Māori.

29. Our Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua tribes in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them.

30. This plan in full is available on AT’s website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

31. There are no unplanned financial implications as a consequence of this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. Risks are managed as part of each AT project.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. In addition to upcoming workshops the local board will consider the LBTCF at its September 2022 business meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Thomas, Elected Member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Ioane Afoa, Operations Performance Manager - Bus

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Local board views on Private Plan Change 76 Kohe, Pukekohe

File No.: CP2022/12012

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a private plan change by Aedifice Development No.1 Limited for 53 Birch Road; 2, 19, 26 and 52 Golding Road; East Street Pukekohe (PT Allt 12 Paro) and part of 31 Ngahere Road, Pukekohe.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers on a private plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan must consider local boards’ views on the plan change if the relevant local boards choose to provide their views.

3. Aedifice Development No.1 Limited (AD1L) lodged a private plan change for seven properties in the eastern side of Pukekohe at 53 Birch Road; 2, 19, 26 and 52 Golding Road; East Street Pukekohe (PT Allt 12 Paro) and part of 31 Ngahere Road. The purpose of the plan change is to rezone approximately 30.61 hectares of land at Pukekohe to Residential – Mixed Housing Urban (MHU) Zone in the Auckland Unitary Plan Operative in Part (AUP). Most of the plan change area is currently zoned Future Urban Zone (FUZ), other than a two metre wide strip along the road edge of 31 Ngahere Road zoned Open Space – Conservation Zone.

4. The plan change request also proposes a new precinct - “Pukekohe East-Central Precinct”. It is predicted by the applicant that the plan change would allow about 850-900 new dwellings in this part of Pukekohe. A new Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Overlay is also proposed by the plan change applying to approximately 9000m2 of native bush.

5. The plan change area is within the Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan area.

6. A total of 12 submissions were received on the plan change.

7. Key themes arising from submissions include funding, timing and effects on infrastructure (transport, wastewater, water supply, power, schools); protection and ongoing management of native bush area; effects on surrounding Future Urban zoned land and concern of an ad hoc approach to providing for development in the area; extension of plan change area to include specific sites and alternative zoning proposed.

8. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on private plan change 76. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provide local board views on private plan change 76 by Aedifice Development No.1 Limited for 53 Birch Road; 2, 19, 26 and 52 Golding Road; East Street Pukekohe (PT Allt 12 Paro) and part of 31 Ngahere Road

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on private plan change 76

c) delegate authority to the chairperson of Franklin Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the private plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

9. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents (ss15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

10. A private plan change request will be included in the AUP if it is approved. Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on private plan change requests – when an entity other than council proposes a change to the AUP.

11. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. The hearing report will address issues raised in local board views and submissions by themes.

12. If appointed by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who decide on the private plan change request.

13. This report provides an overview of the private plan change, and a summary of submissions’ key themes.

14. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey, if the local board expresses its views on private plan change 76. The planner must include any local board views verbatim in the evaluation of the private plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Site and context

15. The plan change area is on the outskirts of Pukekohe (east) within the rural urban boundary, adjacent to ‘live zoned’ residential land to the north and west.

16. Most of the plan change area is located in an area of Future Urban zoned land. The land is bounded by East Street to the north, Golding Road to the east, a reserve strip adjoining Ngahere Road (northern part) and Ngahere Road (south) to the west and Birch Road and rural/residential blocks to the south (see these boundaries marked in red in Figure 1).

17. The Pukekohe Town Centre (with Business zoning), which includes the train station, is located approximately one to two kilometres west of the site. The subject site connects to Pukekohe town centre and State Highway 1 via East Street and Pukekohe East Road.

18. East Street / Pukekohe East Road is classified as an arterial route under the AUP and forms part of an east - west link between the centre of Pukekohe and State Highway 1 Southern Motorway, at the Mill Road interchange. East Street is subject to a 50 km/hr speed limit through the urban area of Pukekohe, which transitions to 70km/hr on Pukekohe East Road. Other adjoining roads are currently classified as local roads.

Figure 1: Plan change area

Map

Description automatically generated

19. The bulk of the subject site is zoned FUZ (see Figures 2 and 3 below). There is a small strip (approximately 2 metres wide) of open space zoning running alongside the eastern side of Ngahere Road that is also included in the land proposed to be rezoned MHU. The strip of open space land is currently owned by Auckland Council.

20. Land to the north of the proposed plan change area across East Street is in an existing MHU Zone. A live MHU zoning also applies to part of the land to the west of the site at its southern end, with a Special Purpose - Major Recreation Facility Zone (and overlying Franklin A&P Showgrounds Precinct) located across Birch Road further to the south. A Residential - Single House zoning applies to adjoining land to the west fronting East Street with an adjoining open space zoning (Rooseville Park) to the south of that. Land across Golding Road to the east, and the land to the south, is zoned Future Urban.

Figure 2: Existing operative AUP zoning

		Future Urban Zone
		Residential – Single House Zone
		Residential – Mixed Housing Suburban Zone
		Residential – Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings Zone
		Business – Local Centre Zone
		Open Space – Conservation Zone
		Open Space – Informal Recreation Zone
		Special Purpose – Major Recreation Facility Zone

Figure 3: Existing strip of open space zone along eastern boundary of Ngahere Road

Diagram

Description automatically generated

21. The plan change area is currently used for rural or rural residential purposes.

22. Approximately 1.4 hectares of native bush is within the plan change area, with the rest generally in pasture.

23. The AUP planning maps identify several permanent streams and overland flow paths across the area. Floodplains (1% AEP) are also identified at the northern end of the site near East Street. There are several areas of moderately steep slopes. See Figure 4.

Figure 4: Contours (orange lines), flood plains (pale blue areas) and overland flow paths (blue lines)

Diagram, map

Description automatically generated

24. The Auckland Plan 2050 seeks that most of Auckland's anticipated population and dwelling growth over the next 30 years be within the existing urban area. This is reflected within the AUP, which seeks to achieve growth within the framework of a quality compact urban form. The Future Urban Land Supply Strategy 2017 (FULSS), sets out the sequencing of future urban land for development within Auckland. The Development Strategy in the Auckland Plan and the FULSS both identify the FUZ area the plan change is within, to be development ready 2023-2027.

25. The plan change area is within the Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan area which was completed by the council in 2019. The structure plan shows the plan change area with:

· Residential – Mixed Housing Urban zoned land

· a 20 metre Riparian Buffer along each side of Permanent and Intermittent Streams

· an area of indigenous vegetation

· 1% AEP Flood Plains

· a potential new Neighbourhood Park (size 3000m2 – 5000m2)

· an indicative collector road connection from Birch Road through to Golding Road (includes walking and cycling network)

· potential local paths routes.

26. Map 1 of the structure plan is shown in Figure 5, with the plan change area indicated within the circle.

Figure 5: Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan map

Diagram

Description automatically generated

27. The Supporting Growth Alliance is a collaboration between Auckland Transport and Waka Kotahi (NZ Transport Agency) in partnership with Auckland Council to plan transport investment in Auckland’s Future Urban zones over the next 10-30 years. Through Supporting Growth a Pukekohe Expressway is proposed as a new connection to improve safety and support the future movement of people and goods between the proposed Mill Road Corridor, State Highway 1 and Pukekohe town centre by providing an alternative route to State Highway 22.

28. The other project being investigated at this stage is the north-east section of an urban arterial which will be an important connection from the proposed Pukekohe Expressway into the planned new eastern growth areas of Pukekohe, providing a link to both the north and east onto Pukekohe East Road. These projects are not yet funded.

29. Electrification of rail services between Pukekohe and Papakura are being progressed. However there is no funding in place for any road network improvements in the Pukekohe area to respond to the increased demands that may arise from development within the plan change area and sites locally that are subject to private plan changes under current consideration.

30. In December 2021 Central Government enacted the Resource Management (Enabling Housing Supply and Other Matters) Amendment Act. As a Tier 1 Council, the Act requires the council to implement Medium Density Housing Standards (MDRS) to enable up to three dwellings of up to three storeys per site in current and future residential zones by August 2022. The Act provides for private plan change requests made before the council notifies its own plan change to implement the MDRS provided it adopts all the zone provisions of a relevant residential zone. The MDRS can then be incorporated for the new residential zone through the council’s plan change.

31. The council has/will notify Plan Change 78 to implement the MDRS on 18 August 2022.

Plan change overview

32. The original plan change request was lodged on 12 November 2021 and further information was provided before the plan change was publicly notified on 26 May 2022. The summary of decisions requested through submissions was notified on 28 July 2022 and the further submission period closed on 11 August 2022.

33. The plan change request states that the purpose of the plan change is principally to rezone approximately 30 hectares of FUZ land in Pukekohe to MHU to allow for development and use to occur in accordance with the zoning sought, whilst also identifying and allocating areas with recognised natural values for protection and management, and public amenity purposes.

34. The plan change request notes that the site is located adjacent to existing urbanised areas surrounding the Pukekohe Town Centre and is appropriate for rezoning at this time

35. The plan change area comprises seven separate properties. There are three existing dwellings with their curtilages. The remainder of the plan change area is generally farming pasture over an undulating contour, interspersed with streams and watercourses.

36. The plan change request states the main stream system and associated floodway will be protected by way of the standard Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) provisions and Chapter E of the AUP, along with precinct provisions which refer back to a concept plan showing a drainage reserve which has a minimum 10 metre riparian buffer to the streams.

37. The plan change request states that a Certificate of Compliance to remove the 1.4 hectares of native bush was recently issued by Auckland Council, however the plan change does propose to protect approximately 0.9 hectares of this by way of a new SEA Overlay.

38. The proposed zoning is as shown in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6: Proposed zoning – Residential – Mixed Housing Urban Zone

Map

Description automatically generated

39. It is noted that, while the land to be rezoned from FUZ to MHU comes close to the northern part of Ngahere Road, it is separated from that part of the road by a 2 metre wide reserve strip zoned open space. To gain direct access to Ngahere Road it will require a reclassification of the 2 metre wide strip of recreation reserve to a local purpose (road) reserve. The applicant advises they are in the process of liaising with Auckland Council and Auckland Transport over this matter.

40. A new precinct – “Pukekohe East-Central Precinct” is proposed. The purpose of the precinct is “… for land use, development and subdivision to be undertaken in a manner that allows the stream and road network to be integrated with residential and open space development within the precinct, and also provide for appropriate stormwater management outcomes.”

41. A precinct plan that shows key movement connections and a proposed drainage reserve area inclusive of minimum 10 metre riparian buffers, and a potential future neighbourhood park (see Figure 7).

Figure 7: Proposed precinct plan

Chart

Description automatically generated with low confidence

42. The proposed precinct provisions require subdivision and development to be undertaken in accordance with the precinct plan, including stream, riparian areas and opportunity for vesting/ future development of a park. The precinct provisions also require stormwater management controls that are specific to the precinct and apply the front boundary fencing (and front yard landscaping) to adjoining open space zoning so that residential interface with these areas provide for privacy as well as opportunities for passive surveillance and streetscape amenity.

43. The private plan change request states:

Overall, the PPC is consistent with the vision and outcomes identified in the structure plan. The proposed rezoning and Precinct Plan provisions would enable higher density residential development in close proximity to public transport and within easy walking distance of open space and amenities. The PPC also seeks to protect as much of the indigenous vegetation (native bush) on the site as possible, provide appropriate riparian buffers, movement links, and opportunity for a future park.

44. The plan change requests identifies three matters where the plan change is not consistent with the structure plan:

· 10 metre riparian buffers are generally proposed, rather than 20 metres. The applicant considers that 20 metre riparian buffers are not necessary or appropriate here and that the proposed buffer and floodway will enable flood water conveyance and management approaches including stream works and riparian planting.

· The plan change does not provide a Collector Road continuing on from Birch Road eastward connecting to Golding Road. Instead, the Precinct Plan shows a west to east Local Road between Birch Road and Golding Road through the southern portion of the subject site. The applicant notes the location of collector roads on the structure plan are indicative only, and that “… based on engineering input and as advised in Ian Munro’s Urban Design report, “the route identified is not well-suited to a collector road…”.

· The 1.4ha bush area on the site is not in the SEA Overlay. However, it is shown on the Pukekohe-Paerata Structure Plan Environment Map as an ‘Indigenous Vegetation’ area and, on behalf of the applicant, Bioresearches has confirmed the area meets the criteria for protection as an SEA. The plan change proposes the SEA Overlay to be added, but over a smaller area than the area shown as indigenous vegetation on the structure plan.

45. The applicant has provided an AEE, a section 32 evaluation report and a wide range of supporting technical documents that evaluate the following:

· Urban design assessment

· Landscape and visual effects assessment

· Recreational assessment

· Economic cost-benefit analysis

· Infrastructure report

· Integrated transport assessment

· Ecological assessment

· Geotechnical assessment

· Stormwater management plan

· Contaminated land assessment (preliminary site assessment (PSI))

· Archaeological assessment.

46. The reports and other plan change request details are available from council’s website at http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/planchanges. Council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· technical reports supplied by the applicant

· submissions

· views and preferences of the local board if the local board passes a resolution.

Themes from submissions received

47. Twelve submissions in total were received on PC76.

48. Five were made by the following organisations:

· Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand

· Ministry of Education

· Waka Kotahi/NZ Transport Agency

· Auckland Transport

· Watercare.

49. Seven submissions were made by individuals.

50. Submission themes are listed below.

· Funding, timing and effects on and provision of infrastructure (transport, wastewater, water supply, power, schools).

· Protection and ongoing management of native bush area.

· Provision of greenspace and alignment with council plans and strategies, such as the Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy and Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri (Auckland's Climate Plan).

· Retention of reserve strip along Ngahere Road under the Reserves Act.

· Effects on surrounding Future Urban zoned land and concern of ad hoc approach to providing for development in the area.

· Extension of plan change area to include additional specific sites.

· Alternative zoning proposed (Residential - Mixed Housing Suburban).

· Contaminated land.

Table 1: Submissions received on Plan Change 76

Submissions	Number or submissions
In support, subject to amendments requested	4
In opposition	1
In opposition, amendments requested if accepted	5
Neutral	2

51. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from council’s website: http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/planchanges.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Context

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

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

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

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

54. However, the RMA currently precludes the second goal: consideration of climate mitigation. Consequently any local board views on climate mitigation will be disregarded by the plan change decision-makers.

55. RMA amendments coming into force next year will enable climate mitigation to be considered. These effects cannot be considered now, unless the private plan change proposes rules about particular greenhouse gas discharges. No rules of that kind are proposed.

56. The applicant, AD1L states the plan change has regard to the effects of climate change by providing for residential development in a location and in a manner that encourages walking, cycling and use of public transport.

Implications for local board views

57. Table 2 provides guidance as to what the local board may wish to consider in forming any view.

In scope for RMA decision-making

Out of scope for RMA decision-making

Climate adaption issues such as:

How should land be allocated to different activities when considering how climate change may affect our environment? How and where should physical resources be constructed?

For example:

· will Auckland be less - or better-prepared for flooding, stress on infrastructure, coastal and storm inundation?

· is ecosystem resilience improved through ecological restoration or reduced by the loss of indigenous habitats?

Climate mitigation issues such as:

· release of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere

· increase in tail-pipe emissions from private car use, use of coal fired or natural gas burners.

Submitters’ views

58. Submissions outlined the following climate change matters:

· retaining green spaces and trees which allow for native flora to thrive for climate change mitigation, providing habitats for fauna, air purification

· emissions reduction (from transport).

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

59. The plan change request states:

Auckland Transport, Watercare, Strategic Growth Alliance and Healthy Waters have all been engaged with at least once and updated documentation/memos are being prepared to engage with them further.

60. The plan change applies to a 2 metre strip of land along the eastern side of Ngahere Road. This land is currently zoned Open Space – Conservation and is owned by Auckland Council. The plan change request states:

Discussions with Auckland Council Community Facilities have been undertaken with regard to this strip of land, where we were advised that, “If the land is not required for recreation reserve we will instigate a process to revoke it and look at possible sale to the adjoining owner, not to declare it to be road.” We have had confirmation from Council Parks officers that the strip is not required for open space purposes. As such, as part of the plan change this strip of land is included for proposed rezoning with the rest of the application Site, with the understanding that further discussions with Council and Eke Panuku will be undertaken at the same time.

61. Auckland Transport and Watercare Services both made a submission on the plan change.

62. Auckland Transport requests the plan change be declined and raises concerns along with amendments if the plan change is accepted to ensure these matters are appropriately addressed. Key concerns raised by Auckland Transport include:

· Adverse effects on the local and wider transport network have not been adequately assessed or addressed

· Lack of consideration of potentially higher yields that may be enabled by the MDRS

· Development occurring ahead of the identification and protect of future transport routes by the Supporting Growth Alliance

· Uncertainty of funding and financing solutions

· Proposed precinct provisions do not adequately provide for or address:

Ø certainty and timing of delivery of safe walking and cycling connections; key design elements and functional requirements of new and existing roads including East Street, Golding Road, Ngahere Road and Birch Road

Ø thresholds or triggers to ensure that subdivision and development is integrated with the delivery of transport infrastructure and services and connect with the surrounding network.

63. Watercare generally supports the plan change request, subject to the following concerns being resolved:

· funding of infrastructure, noting infrastructure to be funded by the developer especially where development occurs ahead of any planned upgrades by Watercare

· staging/timing of infrastructure, noting precinct provisions may be needed to ensure development staging/timing aligns with required infrastructure provision.

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

Local impacts and local board views

64. Plan Change 76 is within the Franklin Local Board area. The plan change area is adjacent to public land for which the local board has some decision-making powers. Rooseville Park is on the opposite side of Ngahere Road, adjacent to the plan change area. The 2 metre strip of reserve land along Ngahere Road subject to the plan change is also owned by the council.

65. This plan change relates to the Franklin Local Board area only.

66. Factors the local board may wish to consider in formulating its view:

· interests and preferences of people in local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

· local board documents, such as local board plan, local board agreement

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

67. The applicant, AD1L states they sent a letter to the Franklin Local Board in October 2021, inviting the local board’s comments on the plan change prior to lodgement. The local board did not provide any comments at that time.

68. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the private plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

69. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori People, well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview). 11,247 residents in the local board area identify as Māori, in 2018 census results.

70. The applicant, AD1L advises it sent a consultation letter to all relevant iwi groups in September 2021 and that two responses were received. These were from Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāti Te Ata requesting Cultural Impact Assessments. Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāti Te Ata both provided cultural values assessments. The plan change area is within an Iwi Statutory Acknowledgment Area for Ngāti Tamaoho

71. No iwi authorities made a submission on this plan change.

72. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The hearing report will analyse the cultural values assessments provided, in particular noting the plan change area contains waterways, indigenous vegetation and a tuff ring. As part of this process, staff will engage directly with mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

73. Costs associated with processing the private plan change request will be recovered from the applicant. Impacts on infrastructure arising from the private plan change request, including any financing and funding issues will be addressed in the hearing report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

74. There is a risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on the plan change, if it doesn’t pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for the Franklin Local Board to express its views and preferences

· the opportunity for a local board member to speak at a hearing.

75. If the local board chooses not to pass a resolution at this business meeting, these opportunities are forgone.

76. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a private plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s) (Local Government Act 2002, Sch 7, cls 36D). This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

77. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

78. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the private plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Katrina David - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill

File No.: CP2022/11742

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback to the Governing Body for when it considers an Auckland Council submission on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill (the Bill).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Bill is an omnibus bill in that it amends several statutes. It:

· removes the restriction of 20 councillors on the Governing Body

· provides a revised process for establishing Māori wards

· allows minor changes to local board boundaries for the purpose of alignment between ward and local board boundaries

· provides a dedicated process for the reorganisation of local boards

· provides more flexibility for lodging candidate nominations (eg electronic nominations)

· provides more detail around resolving ties and conducting recounts

3. The provisions that relate to Auckland Council are in response to submissions the council has made previously. Staff recommend general support for the provisions relating to the number of councillors on the Governing Body, the alignment of boundaries and a separate process for the reorganisation of local boards (as in the proposed Schedule 3A).

4. The process for establishing Māori wards arises out of feedback from consultation on a discussion document. The proposed provisions generally align with the feedback provided by Auckland Council on the discussion document. Some local boards at that time raised the issue of Māori representation on local boards. That has not been addressed in the proposed provisions.

5. Staff recommend support for the provisions relating to candidate nominations, tied votes and recounts.

6. The Bill is attached as Attachment A. There is an explanatory note at the front of the Bill. There is additional information, including Cabinet papers and submissions on the previous discussion document, on the Department of Internal Affairs website: https://www.dia.govt.nz/maori-wards

7. Attachment B contains a comparison of proposed provisions for the reorganisation of local boards in Schedule 3A with the current provisions in Schedule 3.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) consider its feedback on the Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Bill was introduced on 26 July 2022. It has had its first reading and has been referred to the Governance and Administration Committee. Submissions to the committee close on 14 September 2022.

9. The Bill is an omnibus bill and amends three statutes.

10. It amends the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 to remove the set number of councillors on the governing body for Auckland Council. Like every other council, the number of councillors on the governing body will be able to be reviewed to be between 5 and 29 total councillors. Auckland Council has been requesting this since 2015.

11. It amends the Local Electoral Act 2001 to:

a) provide a revised process for establishing Māori wards

b) allow minor changes to local board boundaries for the purpose of alignment between ward and local board boundaries, to be included in the council’s proposal when it conducts its review of representation arrangements

c) provide more flexibility for lodging candidate nominations (eg electronic nominations)

d) provide more detail around resolving ties and conducting recounts.

12. It amends the Local Government Act 2002 to include a new Schedule 3A. The current schedule 3 deals with the reorganisation of councils (establishment, abolishment, amalgamation) and any reorganisation of local boards would currently have to be conducted under those provisions. The proposed schedule 3A provides a process specifically for unitary authorities which have local boards.

13. The Governing Body will consider a submission from Auckland Council at its meeting on 25 August 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Government Auckland Council Act 2009

14. The amendment to the Local Government Auckland Council Act 2009 to remove the restriction on the number of councillors on the governing body has been requested previously by the council. It will allow the council to review the total number of members when it conducts a representation review for the 2025 elections.

15. Every other council in New Zealand is able to review the number of councillors between a minimum of 5 and maximum of 29. In reviewing the number of councillors, Auckland Council will be able to consider Auckland’s growing population. It will also take into account that the number of members elected from Māori wards is proportional to the total number of councillors.

16. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision in line with its previous submissions.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – Māori wards

17. The proposed process for establishing Māori wards has two-steps:

a) A council decides whether it should have Māori representation

b) If a council resolves to have Māori representation, then it must provide for Māori wards when it conducts its representation review.

18. The Bill requires a council to consider Māori representation at the following times:

a) If the council did not have Māori wards for the previous two elections, it must consider Māori representation for the next election

b) If the council did have Māori wards for the previous two elections, then it may consider Māori representation for the next election.

19. Before a council decides whether to have Māori representation it must engage with Māori and other communities of interest and take their views into account.

20. The decision on whether to have Māori representation must be made by 20 December two years prior to an election. The review of representation arrangements takes place in the year prior to an election year, following the decision on Māori representation.

21. Auckland Council’s submission on the discussion document that preceded the bill reflected the position of the Governing Body that Māori representation in local government should be modelled on Māori representation in Parliament. The Parliamentary Māori electorate provisions are contained in legislation – the Electoral Act 1993. Any legislation, before it is made, must provide for public consultation through a select committee. Once enacted, legislation remains in place until Parliament chooses to review it.

22. The proposed process requires councils to consider Māori representation if they do not already have it, including engagement with Māori and the community. There is no requirement on councils to resolve to have Māori representation. However, if a council has Māori representation then it is not required to reconsider Māori representation though it may if it chooses. Staff consider that the proposed process is in line with the previous position of the Governing Body and recommend support for the process.

23. Staff propose that Auckland Council supports these provisions.

24. Some local boards, in their feedback on the previous discussion document, advocated for Māori representation on local boards (the local board equivalent to a Māori ward would be a Māori subdivision). The Bill does not address this. Although possibly out of scope of the current proposals, local boards who feel strongly about Māori representation on local boards might consider advocating for this.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – minor changes to local board boundaries as part of a representation review

25. When a council establishes wards one of the principles it must observe is fair representation. This principle requires that each councillor represents the same number of people as the average across the whole of Auckland, within a 10 per cent margin. The Local Government Commission may approve exceptions to this requirement based on maintaining communities of interest. However, when ward boundaries have to change to meet the fair representation requirement, they get out of alignment with local board boundaries.

26. The Governing Body, at its meeting on 30 July 2015, aware of the potential for such misalignments to occur, resolved to:

“seek legislative change that provides the Local Government Commission the power to determine a change to a local board boundary where the key purpose is to achieve alignment with a ward boundary that is changed as a result of a review of representation; provided that either the change is minor or, if not minor, the change:

(i) ensures effective representation of communities of interest within both the local board area and the ward, and

(ii) is supported by the affected local boards, and

(iii) was publicly notified as part of the representation review.”

(GB/2015/1)

27. The advice received back at the time was that the Minister declined to take this forward. The Bill picks this issue up again but in a slightly different way.

28. Presently the boundaries of local boards can only be altered through a reorganisation process. This is a resource intensive process which means it is unlikely to be used to make minor changes to local board boundaries.

29. The Bill provides that a unitary authority, when it proposes its representation arrangements, is able to include proposals for adjusted local board boundaries in order to maintain alignment with ward boundaries where these are minor. The extent of permissible adjustment will be defined in regulations in terms of the maximum population transfer permitted. Staff expect this quantity to be low.

30. Such changes would need to result in boundaries that enable democratic local decision making by, and on behalf of, communities of interest throughout the district and enable equitable provision to be made for the current and future well-being of all communities of interest within the affected area. They would also, so far as practical, coincide with ward boundaries.

31. Staff consider that this provision will most likely be rarely used but support its inclusion as an option available to the council when it conducts its review of representation arrangements. The provisions in the Bill mean that any proposal to change local board boundaries will be included in the council’s initial proposal. The Governing Body has, in the past, consulted with local boards on any matters it includes in the council’s initial proposal that affect local boards. Following public notification of the initial proposal, the public and local boards can make submissions and the Governing Body then decides the council’s final proposal which is publicly notified for objections and appeals. The Local Government Commission determines any objections and appeals. There is therefore ample opportunity for consideration of a proposal to change local board boundaries to align with ward boundaries, with local boards and the public able to make their views known.

32. There are operational costs associated with changes to local board boundaries and these would need to be considered as part of any change to local board boundaries. For example, records on council’s property database include a local board field. A change to a local board’s boundaries would require changes to affected property records.

33. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports these provisions.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – ties and recounts

34. The Bill provides that rather than resolving a tie by lot, a judicial recount is held. A council cannot be sworn in until recounts are resolved, but an urgent meeting may be held if necessary.

35. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision.

Local Electoral Act 2001 – candidate nominations

36. The Bill provides for candidates to submit nominations in a manner approved by the Electoral Officer (such as electronically).

37. Staff propose that the Auckland Council supports this provision.

Local Government Act 2002 – Schedule 3A - Establishment or reorganisation of local board areas in unitary authority districts

38. Currently any reorganisation of local boards would have to be carried out under the provisions relating to reorganisation of local authorities (Schedule 3 of the Local Government Act 2022). Because of this, these provisions are cumbersome when used solely to address local board numbers and boundaries within a single unitary authority. For example, they provide for dealing with assets and for transition committees, which are not relevant to local board reorganisation.

39. The Bill proposes a new Schedule 3A as a replacement for Schedule 3 when being used to addressing local board numbers and boundaries within a single unitary authority. It retains the two alternative processes for determining a reorganisation plan, but removes unnecessary requirements:

a) The Local Government Commission conducts an investigation, on receipt of a re-organisation initiative or a request for an investigation, and, as a result, adopts a re-organisation plan

b) A unitary authority adopts a re-organisation plan which the Local Government Commission must approve if the requirements in the Bill are met.

40. Attachment B contains a table comparing the current process under Schedule 3 with the proposed process under Schedule 3A. This shows the process the council would use for a reorganisation of local boards without a legislation change compared to the process with the legislation change.

41. The following describes the key elements of the process in Schedule 3A.

First process

42. Under the first process, a unitary authority or group of 10 per cent or more of electors (of the affected area), or the Minister, may submit a reorganisation initiative or request for an investigation. Before making a decision on whether to investigate the Commission must consult the unitary authority and any affected local board. If the Commission decide to investigate, it must adopt a process. The process must include consultation.

43. The Commission must take into account how best to achieve all of the following objectives:

a) enabling democratic decision making by, and on behalf of, communities within the local board area

b) better enabling the purpose of local government to be given effect to within the local board area

c) efficiencies and cost savings

d) assurance that a local board has the resources necessary to enable it to effectively perform or exercise its responsibilities, duties, and powers in respect of any local board area established or change

e) effective responses to the opportunities, needs, and circumstances of the affected areas

f) better alignment of local board areas with communities of interest

g) enhanced effectiveness of decision making for non-regulatory activities of a unitary authority

h) enhanced ability of local government to meet the changing needs of communities for governance and services into the future

i) effective provision for any co-governance and co-management arrangements that are established by legislation (including Treaty of Waitangi claim settlement legislation) and that are between local authorities and iwi or Māori organisations.

44. The Commission may then adopt a reorganisation plan. In deciding whether to adopt a reorganisation plan the Commission must have regard for:

a) the scale of the potential benefits of the proposed changes in terms of the objectives set out in the previous paragraph and the likelihood of those benefits being realised

b) the financial, disruption, and opportunity costs of implementing the proposed changes at the proposed time

c) the risks and consequences of not implementing the proposed changes at the proposed time

d) existing communities of interest and the extent to which the proposed changes will maintain linkages between communities (including iwi and hapū) and sites and resources of significance to them

e) the degree and distribution of demonstrable public support for the proposed changes within communities in the affected area

f) the degree and distribution of any public opposition to the proposed changes within communities in the affected area.

45. A reorganisation plan specifies:

a) the name of the district of the unitary authority

b) the number and names of local board areas within the district

c) the boundaries of—

(i) each local board area

(ii) electoral subdivisions, if any, of each local board area

d) the number of elected members of the local board for each local board area and, if a local board area is subdivided for electoral purposes, the number of members to be elected by the electors of each subdivision

e) whether each local board may include members appointed by the governing body of the unitary authority

f) for each local board, whether the chairperson of the local board is to be—

(i) elected by the members of the local board from among themselves using one of the systems of voting set out in the Local Government Act 2002; or

(ii) directly elected to that office by the electors of the local board area.

46. The provision in e) is relevant to local boards established under the Local Government Act 2002 and does not apply to Auckland Council local boards (Auckland Council local boards are established under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009). It allows a unitary authority to appoint ward councillors to local boards.

47. The provision in f) is also relevant to local boards established under the Local Government Act 2002 and not Auckland Council local boards.

Second process

48. The second process is termed a unitary authority-led reorganisation application. A unitary authority may adopt a reorganisation plan as if it were the Commission and then submit it to the Commission for approval.

49. Before submitting a unitary authority-led reorganisation application, the unitary authority must consider any views and preferences expressed by any local boards that would be affected by the reorganisation plan.

50. The reorganisation plan must be accompanied by—

a) a statement that

· explains how the plan will achieve the objectives (as set out above for an investigation by the Commission)

· provides a balanced assessment of the reorganisation plan and outlines the advantages and disadvantages of the plan.

b) a report from the affected unitary authority, adopted by that unitary authority, that records—

(i) unconditional support for the plan from the governing body of the unitary authority

(ii) any views and preferences expressed by any local boards that would be affected by the reorganisation plan

(iii) the public consultation undertaken by the unitary authority

(iv) the themes and outcomes of that consultation.

51. The Local Government Commission must not approve the reorganisation plan if:

a) the reorganisation plan is not accompanied by the required documentation; or

b) the Commission considers, on reasonable grounds, that—

(i) the provisions for adopting reorganisation plans, their notification and content, were not complied with; or

(ii) the unitary authority has not complied with the requirement to consider the views of affected local boards; or

(iii) the plan does not have the support of affected communities.

Submission

52. Staff consider the council should support a streamlined process defined for the reorganisation of local boards within a single unitary authority. The proposed process maintains the essence of the current process but provides a process that is more fit for purpose for local boards and requires a unitary authority to consider the views and preferences of affected local boards.

53. There has been longstanding provision for reorganising community boards as part of the review of representation arrangements conducted by a territorial authority. Community boards may be established and disestablished as a part of such a representation review. An option might be to deal with the reorganisation of local boards through a representation review similarly to community boards. Staff consider that this would not be appropriate. Local boards are a part of the shared decision-making governance of Auckland Council and not just a means of increasing representation at the community level. It is more appropriate for the reorganisation of local boards to be dealt with as if they were local authorities rather than as if they were community boards but the processes for reorganisation should be simpler than those for local authorities – as being proposed in Schedule 3A.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

54. The proposals being considered in this report are neutral in terms of impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

55. The outcome of a change in representation arrangements or the organisation of local boards would have implications for the group. However, the proposed legislative change is about the process for deciding the outcomes and not about the outcomes themselves.

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

Local impacts and local board views

56. The provisions relating to the alignment of local board and ward boundaries and the provisions for the reorganisation of local boards are of major significance to local boards. Local boards will be supported by local board staff with feedback or drafting their own submissions for attachment to the Auckland Council submission approved by the Governing Body.

57. The provisions relating to Māori wards are of significance to those local boards who consider there needs to be Māori representation on local boards (Māori subdivisions).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

58. Staff are currently engaging with mana whenua and mataawaka on Māori representation. The models being considered are the ‘Parliamentary’ model (which the current legislation provides), the ‘Royal Commission’ model (which provides for an appointed mana whenua councillor as well as two elected members) and other less-developed models.

59. The current position of the Governing Body is to support the Parliamentary model but the Independent Māori Statutory Board has asked the Governing Body to also consider the Royal Commission model. The incoming Governing Body will reconsider its position based on feedback from the engagement in December 2022.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

60. There are no financial implications surrounding the decisions to make a submission.

61. The proposed legislative provisions may or may not have financial implications. Engaging with the community on establishing Māori wards will have a cost. Increasing the number of councillors will have costs associated with councillor support and corporate property and technology assets. The reorganisation of local boards will have an associated cost.

62. Increasing the number of councillors is likely to have an impact on the remuneration of councillors under current Remuneration Authority determination framework.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

63. With all submissions to Parliament the time frame is constrained and there is a risk that local boards and the Governing Body do not have sufficient time to consider all the ramifications. Usually this risk is mitigated in the sense that all other councils, Local Government New Zealand and Taituarā also make submissions – any aspect that is missed by one may be picked by another. However most other councils will not be interested in the provisions that apply only to Auckland or that apply only to unitary authorities. The mitigation here is that there has been good communication between the Department of Internal Affairs and Auckland Council at staff level.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. Staff will be reporting the Bill to the Governing Body on 25 August 2022 and seeking approval for a submission to the Select Committee.

65. Boards who wish their feedback to be reported to the Governing Body should provide it by Monday 22 August 2022. Staff will recommend that the Governing Body delegates further consideration of local board feedback to the mayor and deputy mayor following the Governing Body meeting, then those boards who cannot meet the 22 August 2022 deadline have until Friday 26 August 2022.

66. The deadline for submissions to the select committee is 14 September 2022.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local Government Electoral Legislation Bill	199
b ⇩	Comparison of current Schedule 3 and proposed Schedule 3A	245

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Local board feedback on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant programme 2022/2023

File No.: CP2022/12009

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board feedback on the proposed new Auckland Climate Grant, including grant programme scope and criteria, priority action focus areas and timing of funding rounds.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Budget for a climate grant programme was allocated through the 10-year Budget 2021-2031.

3. In 2021/2022 these additional funds were distributed through the existing Regional Environment and Natural Heritage grant while staff worked to establish a new grant scheme.

4. Staff have now developed a proposal for a new Auckland Climate Grant. This has been developed with feedback from mana whenua and community group stakeholders.

5. In 2022/2023 the Auckland Climate Grants programme has a budget of $400,000.

6. The purpose of the grant scheme is to support projects that will:

· reduce greenhouse gas emissions through community-based action

· build community resilience to climate change impacts

· support Māori-led responses to climate change

7. Key priority areas for funding for the grant in 2022/2023 have been identified, based on the priorities in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri and an analysis of other available grants. They are:

· Transport: Projects that support a low carbon and safe transport system.

· Built environment and Energy: Projects that support a built environment and energy system that provides for a low carbon, climate disaster resilient Auckland.

· Food: Projects that support a low carbon, resilient, local food system and enable Aucklanders to make sustainable and healthy food choices.

· Māori-led projects: Projects that build Māori capacity to respond to climate impacts and support mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce emissions and build community resilience.

8. All local board feedback received by 26 August 2022 on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant will inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee.

9. The proposed Auckland Climate Grant will be presented to the Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval on 8 September 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provide feedback on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant.

Horopaki

Context

New funding for a climate grant scheme

10. Budget for a climate grant programme was allocated through the 10-year Recovery Budget 2021-2031. The grant was intended to provide increased investment to support local community-based climate projects that would:

· reduce emissions

· increase community resilience to climate impacts

· generate more community-based climate action projects, reaching at least 20,000 Aucklanders over 10 years.

11. Previously support for regional sustainable living projects has been allocated through the Regional Environment and Natural Heritage (RENH) grant programme.

12. In 2020/2021 staff distributed the increased funding for community climate projects through the RENH. This allowed funds to be allocated rapidly to the community by December 2021, after the adoption of the Recovery Budget in July 2021.

13. While funds were being allocated in this fashion, staff carried out a review of the current processes used to distribute climate and sustainability grants through the RENH along with the other priorities it covers such as conservation, water quality and kaitiakitanga.

14. The review showed that there are various disadvantages to continuing to use the existing Regional Environmental and Natural Heritage Grant to distribute climate and sustainability projects. These include that the:

· the existing process covers many priorities with less clear guidance about what type of climate projects to fund than might be expected from a stand-alone climate grant

· assessment processes are more complex and time consuming for staff due to the wide range of priorities – they require various moderation and review workshops to ensure that grants are being compared fairly across the range of priority areas.

15. Staff determined that creating a stand-alone climate grant would provide a better experience for applicants and simplify and improve the grant assessment process.

Stocktake of existing grants and analysis of allocations

16. To develop a new climate grant, staff carried out a review of other grants that are available to fund projects which have climate outcomes. Grants identified include the:

· RENH – provides funding for conservation projects

· Community Coordination and Facilitation grant – supports capacity building for conservation groups

· Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund

· Love Food Hate Waste

· Auckland Transport Community Bike Fund

· Ngā Tiriti Ngangahau - The Vibrant Streets Programme

· local board grants to projects with climate outcomes.

17. Grants external to Auckland Council, such as those offered through Foundation North were also considered. This process aimed to avoid the grant ‘duplicating’ or ‘replacing’ other potential sources of funding for community groups.

18. Staff also analysed allocations from regional and local grants to over 200 projects with climate outcomes over the last five years. This review yielded insights into which areas the community are already active and working in (and seeking funding in). It also identified that some Aucklanders are being under-served by our current grants processes.

19. The proposed new climate grant aims to expand areas of community enthusiasm for climate action and to make the grant process more accessible to some under-served groups (including Māori, Pacific people, other diverse ethnic groups and youth-led organisations).

20. Three online workshops were also held to get feedback from community group stakeholders and previous grant applicants in May 2022.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. An outline of the proposed grant purpose, priorities, criteria, activities that are in scope and exclusions are provided below for local board members to review.

Proposed grant purpose

22. For the 2022/2023 pilot year the Auckland Climate Grant programme has a proposed purpose of supporting projects that:

· reduce greenhouse gas emissions through community-based action

· build community resilience to climate change impacts

· support Māori-led responses to climate change

23. The Auckland Climate Grant programme will support community projects focused on providing resources, education, and opportunities that result in more Aucklanders engaging with climate change issues. It will support Aucklanders to make behaviour changes in areas with the greatest greenhouse gas emissions reduction potential.

24. Projects that support reductions in greenhouse gas emission will be the focus for the 2022/2023 funding allocations with a target allocation of 70 per cent of grants. This allocation target will be reviewed annually. This 70 per cent may also include projects that are Māori-led (the purpose statements are not exclusive).

25. The Auckland Climate Grant programme will also support projects that build community resilience to respond to the impacts of climate change. Projects should focus on giving Aucklanders a voice in proactive community resilience planning and climate adaptation, particularly communities who will be the most vulnerable to climate impacts and have traditionally been under-served by the council.

26. By building stronger connections between neighbours and within neighbourhoods, at key community sites, and with community-based organisations, projects can create resilience against climate-related stresses with a focus on food and energy.

27. The Auckland Climate grant programme will also aim to support projects that enable mana whenua and mātāwaka to respond to climate change. The allocation of funding will recognise the partnership between the council and Māori-led organisations – particularly mana whenua in the council’s role as a partner under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Scope and criteria

28. Projects supported through the Auckland Climate Grant programme should meet one or more of the following criteria:

· result in new or expanded climate action activity, either by implementing new initiatives, or by significantly expanding the scope or coverage of existing activities

· support mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce carbon emissions and build community resilience to climate related impacts

· provide support and resources to Māori organisations and community groups to build organisational capacity and capability, develop strategic plans and develop sustainable funding models, increasing the total funding or support secured for climate projects in Auckland

· increase participation in climate action activity in high emission communities (generally, higher income communities) targeting the highest emitting behaviours

· increase participation in activities that build community resilience in under-served communities who most need our support to respond to climate impacts

· support Aucklanders of different ages, abilities and ethnicities to take climate action.

Climate action priority areas

29. Projects supported through the climate grant may address a wide range of the priorities included in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan including built environment, energy, transport, communities and coast, food, and Te Puawaitanga ō te Tātai.

30. For the 2022/2023 pilot year priority will be given to applications under the transport, energy and food themes and to Māori-led projects. This will include:

· Transport: Projects that support a low carbon, safe transport system that delivers social, economic and health benefits for all.

· Food: Projects that support a low carbon, resilient, local food system that provides all Aucklanders with access to fresh, sustainable, affordable and healthy food and projects that support Aucklanders to make sustainable dietary choices.

· Energy: Projects that support a built environment and energy system that provides for a low carbon, climate disaster resilient Auckland.

· Māori-led projects: Projects building Māori capacity to respond to climate change and supporting mana whenua and mātāwaka to reduce emissions and build community resilience.

31. Some projects that support other priorities in the plan may also be funded. These include:

· Built environment: Projects that support a low carbon and resilient built environment.

· Communities: Projects that support communities to increase awareness of climate change and to prepare for changes in our climate and coastline and projects that support Aucklanders to understand their carbon footprints and changes they can made to reduce these.

32. Applicants will be directed for future guidance on what types of activities to support through these priorities to Auckland Council’s Live Lightly website, which provides advice and information for individuals and community groups on climate change: https://livelightly.nz/

33. Priority areas will be updated on an annual basis.

Exclusions

34. General grant programme exclusions outlined in the Community Grants policy will apply to the Auckland Climate Grants. In addition, specific exclusions for the Auckland Climate Grants programme are:

· climate action projects focused on the natural environment, industry and the economy are out of scope for the Auckland Climate Grant programme – this will avoid duplication with other funds such as the RENH and Climate Connect, the new climate innovation hub being developed by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

· projects with a focus on the circular economy, food waste, composting, upcycling, recycling, repair and reuse should apply through the Waste Minimisation and Innovation Fund

· activities whose primary purpose is the private gain or advancing of private business interests without a significant public good component

· purchase of vehicles and any related ongoing maintenance, repair, overhead costs or road user charges

· conference fees and costs

· funding for existing roles or organisational costs

· subscription services where these are ongoing and not associated with a specific event or outcome

· replication of council services

· websites and electronic platforms.

Applicants

35. The grant will be open to community groups, neighbourhoods, mana whenua and mātāwaka applicants, social enterprises, businesses, business improvement districts and education providers (early childhood centres, schools, kura and tertiary institutions).

36. Staff propose to hold several response grants rounds which are intended to make the application process quicker, simpler and easier for community groups and increase the volume of successful applications from under-served groups.

Types of grants available

37. Grants from $1,000 up to $50,000 will be offered, with both response grants and strategic grants available as shown in Table 1 below.

Response grants ($1,000 - $15,000)

38. These grants seek to grow community participation in climate action, and amplify existing community action, particularly among under-served communities such as youth, Pacific peoples and Māori-led groups.

39. Applications will be encouraged from groups that have not previously engaged with climate action activity or are rapidly building capacity in this area.

40. Staff propose that for these smaller grants, allocation decisions will be made by the General Manager of Environmental Services.

Strategic grants ($15,000 – $50,000)

41. These grants seek to support programmes and activities aligning with the Auckland Climate Grant purpose, scope and priority actions. Strategic grants will be expected to have more significant impacts than response grants. They could potentially be used to either expand best practise projects or develop innovative new responses to the climate challenge.

42. Staff propose that allocation decisions for strategic grants could be made by the Environment and Climate Change Committee (or equivalent committee) in future years.

43. In 2022, because of the timing of the proposed grant adoption decision in early September, staff propose that decision-making for the strategic grant be delegated to the General Manager Environmental Services for this year. This will provide continuity of funding for community groups by December 2022.

44. If grants are approved by a committee of council, it will not be possible for them to be allocated to community groups until May 2023 due to the timing of the election and the Christmas and New Year holidays.

Table 1. Timing of grants rounds

Open

Close

Decision date

Response grants

September 2022

February 2023

April 2023

October 2022

March 2023

May 2023

November 2022

April 2023

June 2023

Strategic grants

September 2022

October 2022

December 2022

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

45. The Auckland Climate Grant will support projects that lead to community climate change action to reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts. The provision of grants through the Auckland Climate Grant programme contributes towards Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan action area C4: Remove barriers and support community initiatives that reduce emissions and build resilience in a fair way.

46. Individual projects supported through the Auckland Climate Grant programme may respond to a range of action areas within Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan including:

· Action area T3: Increase access to bicycles, micro-mobility devices and the safe, connected and dedicated infrastructure that supports their use.

· Action area C1: Work together to strengthen the resilience of our communities, people and places.

· Action area F4: Increase supply and demand for local, seasonal and low carbon food.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. The Auckland Climate Grants may potentially impact work within the Waste Solutions and Customer and Community Services departments, and the existing support provided to community-led food initiatives. Input from the Waste Solutions department and Regional Service Planning, Investment and Partnerships team within Customer and Community Services was sought during the development of the Auckland Climate Grant and their views on relevant applications will be sought during the delivery of the 2022/2023 pilot grant rounds.

48. The Auckland Climate Grants support of community-led transport initiatives may have an impact on Auckland Transport. Input from Auckland Transport was sought during the Auckland Climate Grant development and their views on relevant applications will be sought during the delivery of the 2022/2023 pilot grant rounds.

49. Input into the Auckland Climate Grant was sought from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited. These grants will not overlap with support provided through Climate Connect and there is no impact on Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

50. The Environment Climate Committee decision is not a strategy, bylaw, policy or plan so the local board’s feedback can be made under delegated authority if needed (Local Government Act 2022, sch7 clause 36D (1) (a)).

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Equitable geographical distribution of grant allocations across different local board areas will be considered alongside other factors when setting funding recommendations for the Auckland Climate Grants.

52. Information on funding allocation and successful applicants will be provided to all relevant local boards following the approval of grant recommendations by the General Manager Environmental Services or Environment and Climate Change Committee.

53. Local boards have the ability to operate their own local grants programmes and may choose to fund local climate action projects and activities, some of which may complement the grants provided at a regional level, or vice versa.

54. Local board views are being sought on the proposal to establish the Auckland Climate Grant programme. Local board feedback will inform the recommendation to the Environment and Climate Change Committee on 8 September 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55. Staff presented to the Infrastructure and Environmental Services Mana Whenua Hui seeking feedback from mana whenua kaitiaki representatives on aspects of the grant development.

56. Key feedback points included the need for the grant process to be easy and accessible to mana whenua organisations and for the grants to build capacity of mana whenua to respond to climate change.

57. From December 2021 to March 2022, Māori specialists in the Community Climate Action team also met with each of the 19 iwi to seek their feedback on climate priorities that they would like to see advanced through the sustainable and resilient marae project. Feedback from mana whenua through this process has informed the priorities identified in the grant scheme, particularly in relation to Māori-led climate action.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

58. Budget for the Auckland Climate Grants was allocated through the 10-year Recovery Budget 2021-2031. For 2022/2023 financial year there is $300,000 available for allocation.

59. As climate projects had historically been supported through the Regional Environment and Natural Heritage (RENH) grant programme, $100,000 from the RENH grant budget will be used to support grant allocations through the Auckland Climate grant.

60. Grant allocations through the Auckland Climate grant response and strategic grant rounds will be managed within the $400,000 total grant budget. The majority of funds will be allocated through the strategic grants round.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

61. A risk assessment has only identified two low level risks associated with the adoption of the Auckland Climate Grant programme. These are listed below along with the mitigations:

· Low reputational risk – applicants may query the grant scope, priorities and decision making and feel these are inconsistent or unfair. This risk is mitigated through the grant development process seeking community input and the transparent evaluation and assessment process applied to guide decision making.

· Low financial risk – insufficient applications of sufficiently high quality will be received to fully allocate available funds. This risk is mitigated through grant programme promotion and applicant support. Support with the application process will be available from Auckland Council staff and community contractors involved with delivery of other areas of the Community Climate Action Team local and regional work programme.

62. Once grant allocation decisions are made, staff will maintain regular contact with grant recipients during project implementation to follow up on progress and make sure any risks of individual projects are properly addressed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

63. All local board feedback received by 26 August 2022 on the proposed Auckland Climate Grant will be considered before an updated version is presented to committee.

64. Staff will present the proposed Auckland Climate Grant to Environment and Climate Change Committee for approval on 8 September 2022.

65. Once guidelines for the Auckland Climate Grant have been approved, staff will start the promotion and delivery of 2022/2023 Auckland Climate Grant funding rounds.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Emma Cowie-Dixon - Principal Advisor

Jacob van der Poel - Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Urgent Decision - Franklin Local Board input into the Water Services Entities Bill submission by Auckland Council

File No.: CP2022/10528

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To report on the Urgent Decision made by Franklin Local Board to provide feedback on the Water Services Entities Bill, which was introduced to Parliament on 2 June and referred to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on 9 June 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. At its meeting on 26 November 2019 the Franklin Local Board resolved (FR/2019/168) the following in relation to urgent decision-making:

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) adopt the urgent decision-making process for matters that require a decision where it is not practical to call the full board together and hold a meeting with requirements of a quorum.

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

c) agree that the relationship manager (or any person/s acting in this role) will authorise the urgent decision-making process by signing off an authorisation memo.

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

3. Auckland Council has been given the opportunity to provide feedback on the Water Services Entities Bill, which was introduced to Parliament on 2 June and referred to the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee on 9 June 2022. Submissions closed 22 July.

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

5. Local board input into that submission was being sought, with a deadline of 18 July 2022 for feedback to be considered in the council’s submission or 19 July 2022 for feedback to be appended. A draft submission was prepared by staff and was shared with local boards on 15 July 2022.

10. The next Franklin Local Board meeting was Tuesday 26 July and therefore, the opportunity for the local board to formalise its feedback by resolution fell outside of the scheduled business meeting times, and an urgent decision was required.

Ngā tūtohunga

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) notes the Urgent Decision finalised on 19 July 2022, which provided the following feedback to the Governing Body on the Government’s Resource Management system reform amendment proposal (Water Services Entity Bill):

Concerns around the four-entity model

i) Auckland’s water supply is predominately sourced through assets within the Franklin Local Board area. The Hūnua Ranges, as the site that provides 68% of Auckland’s water supply, also provides significant local recreational amenity, is an environmental taonga and driver of local economic activity. Pukekohe is also the site of the main connection to the water treatment plant from the Waikato River. As such, the risk to and impact on communities at the local level from the proposed four entity model is greater than other parts of Auckland or Northland and request inclusion in any regional forum group or entity on the basis of Franklin’s strategic importance to the water supply

ii) the board suggest proportional governance refinements to the proposed Regional advisory panel to enable local representation i.e. representation from the elected representatives of communities within the Franklin Local Board area to ensure local risk and impact is managed and that local priorities are not unfairly compromised in the interests of regional and entity-wide considerations

iii) the board considers that the proposed governance and representation arrangements create a risk to collaboration between entity governance and Auckland Council particularly at a local level. For example, Watercare as the current water service provider has actively worked with the Franklin Local Board to enable the development of a Hunua Traverse (part of the NZ Cycle Trail) and associated local economic development activity. The Healthy Waters department have actively worked with the local board to enable recreational amenity on stormwater management assets at Drury. The board is concerned that these local initiatives would be considered hyper-local by a largely removed entity, to the disadvantage of local communities.

Centralisation must be balanced with increased local voice

iv) advocate that community voices are critical and mechanisms to have their say must be with local consultation and democratic input, and clarity is needed on the consumer engagement and community engagement models

v) appreciate the inclusion of consumer forums to help the Water Services Entity understand consumer requirements and expectations, to reflect and represent the diverse interests of consumers throughout the region

vi) however, the purpose is broad and in order for the forum to engage successfully, technical specialists and community stakeholders who have the ability to effectively reflect and represent the interests of a region are needed (i.e. local boards’ role in representing the views of their local communities).

Councils place making role is critical

vii) consider the wider implications of stormwater management capabilities alignment with local board plans and strengths for greater cohesion:

· footpath network and its function for communities

· local character implications

· social infrastructure for parks and play provision

· community wellbeing, growth and development.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent Decision - Water Services Entities Bill	269

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Denise Gunn - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

23 August 2022

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Franklin Local Board Quarter for quarter four 2021/2022

File No.: CP2022/12000

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Franklin Local Board with an integrated quarterly performance report for Quarter Four, 1 April to 30 June 2022 and the overall performance for the financial year against the approved 2021/2022 local board work programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Franklin Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2021/2022 financial year. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Franklin Local Board Plan 2020 outcomes.

3. 126 activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered including multi-year projects that have progressed as expected. 14 activities were undelivered, cancelled, put on hold or deferred and 8 multi-year projects/activities have not progressed as expected during 2021/2022.

4. Key activity achievements from the 2021/2022 work programme include:

· Bledisloe Park: This initiative is an upgrade on lighting and sports field to meet demand due to growth in the area. The upgrade will increase playing capacity to support the sports network in the area. The new lights have been installed and the new turf has been sowed ready to be used by the community.

· Clevedon Showgrounds Reserve: The installation of connector footpaths is underway.

· Waterways Protection Fund: Seven landowners were approved funding at 26 April 2022 business meeting (resolution FR/2022/45) totalling $67,444. Two large applications were referred to the regional waterway protection fund. Projects began to get underway in June 2022. This financial year the Franklin Local Board funding has enabled 1.83 kilometres of fencing which is protecting 1.55 kilometres of waterways and 28,489 square metres of area around waterways, as well as funding 12,687 native plants.

· Predator Free Franklin Te Ara Hikoi: Membership has risen to 1410 people which is a 44.8 per cent increase since quarter three. Through quarter four, eight hub days, one community meet-up and three working bees were held. The internally developed Tawhiti smart cage trap data has been analysed and results show it to be fifteen times more effective at catching pests than any other trap currently on the local market, including all automated traps. Te Ara Hīkoi trust has now been created which has charitable status.

5. Key activities not delivered / not progressed as expected include:

· Kawakawa Bay Boat Ramp: The detailed design has been completed for accessway construction for replacement of the pontoons, however timing is dependent on approval of final designs and budget. The current estimate is that a contractor will be appointed by September 2022.

· Wai-o-Manu Reserve development: The draft operational management plan was to have been presented to the Joint Management Committee in July 2022 for approval. Timelines have changed and the draft needs to be workshopped with the local board before being formally approved at a business meeting by the new local board in early 2023.

· Glenbrook Beach: Investigate renewal of wave barrier and boat ramp. In quarter four a designer was appointed to report on options for the renewal of the wave barrier and to explore the feasibility of improvements to the recreational boat launching facilities. Contractor appointment is scheduled for March 2023 but is dependent on budget.

6. Qualifying budgets of unfinished activities will be carried forward into 2022/2023 work programmes.

7. The financial performance report is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on releasing annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) – on or about 30 August 2022.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for quarter four ending 30 June 2022.

b) note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group results for 2021/2022 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public on or about 29 August 2022.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Franklin Local Board has an approved 2021/2022 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Local Economic Development

· Plans and Places

· Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

9. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

COVID-19 restrictions

10. Auckland has faced COVID-19 restrictions (Level 3 and 4) from 17 August to 2 December 2021, when all of New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework, also known as the traffic lights. Auckland went into traffic light red, moving to traffic light orange on 30 December 2021.

11. Auckland Council regional and community facilities were closed in Level 3 and 4. Restrictions were slightly eased in Level 3, Step 2 and from mid-November 2021 libraries and the majority of arts and community centres were reopened. Pools and leisure centres were able to reopen from 3 December 2021 when New Zealand moved to the COVID-19 Protection Framework.

12. From 30 December 2022 until 13 April 2022, Auckland was in the red traffic light setting under the COVID-19 Protection Framework, which impacted council and community-delivered event planning and programming. From 13 April 2022 Auckland has been in the orange traffic light setting.

13. COVID-19 has also had an impact on the supply chain for capital projects materials causing delays.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

14. The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme performance by RAG status

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

15. The graph below shows the stage of the activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

Chart, waterfall chart

Description automatically generated

Key activity updates from quarter four

16. The following are key activity updates from quarter four and are aligned to outcomes in the Franklin Local Board Plan.

Our strengths generate local opportunity and prosperity

· Franklin Economic Broker: The role continues to deliver the work programme. The XLabs pilot, a circular economy programme for businesses, has gone into the follow-up phase with participants and participation still high. The Kai Franklin programme is funded by the board to champion local businesses to have opportunities to grow local prosperity and employment. The broker has been working on the initiative in conjunction with Peter Gordon and Homeland. Homeland established as a restaurant and cooking school and as a food ambassador to local products and producers; and brokered an appearance on the Breakfast Show on TVNZ 1. The Economic Broker provides regular work programme updates to the local board.

· Franklin Arts Broker programme - During quarter four, the Pukekohe Mural Project led by local high school teacher Catherine Tamihere, working with nationally acclaimed artist Jimmy Kouratoras, was completed and received national recognition in media. This project was also supported by the Unlock Pukekohe (Small T) projects to acknowledge local history and find a pathway forward for the community together.

· Access to community places - A decrease of both participant numbers (45 percent) and bookings hours (59 percent) compared to the same period last year with the top two activity types being arts and cultural events and religious activity. 90 percent of hirers indicated that they were satisfied with the venues they have visited in the local board area. Five-year plans for four halls have been completed, working closely with the hall committees and a workshop was held with the local board in July to obtain direction on next year's funding for all 19 halls and the process to determine funding for community owned halls for the following year (2023/2024).

Key activity achievements from the 2021/2022 work programme

17. The key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2021/2022 include:

· Glenbrook Beach beachfront - renew coastal assets: Public consultation has been completed with draft responses provided to mana whenua. The findings along with advice will then be provided to the local board

· Papakura Stream landowner engagement programme: Multiple plantings were completed across the Papakura Stream catchment. In celebration of the 100-year anniversary of the Filipino state, a Filipino group held two corporate events and a community planting day in Brookby. From June 12 to 16, a corporate group of 20 people planted at Brookby Equestrian, and 100 people planted at Brookby Wildlife Habitat. On June 22 and 23, 240 students and supervisors from Epsom Normal School planted trees at Papatoetoe Pony Club in Brookby. A tree planting challenge was held at Brookby Wildlife Habitat on June 29, where 10 corporate teams competed to plant the most trees. Another 21,000 trees have been acquired from the Waterways Protection Fund to plant across four properties from July to September 2022.

· Local Māori responsiveness: Co-design sessions were held for the rangatahi voter participation key messaging. Video content is being developed and scheduled for completion in July, with promotion to begin prior to elections. Tuia rangatahi attended national wānanga in Tokanui to connect, learn and develop their governance journey. South Strategic Brokers supported Local Board Services (LBS) through a partnership with Ōtara Health to facilitate the Ara Kōtui (improving Māori input into local board decision-making) project to date. A discussion was initiated with Ara Kōtui mana whenua representatives and southern local boards on the co-design process to explore further shared decision-making. LBS will be the lead department for this key relationship project in the future.

Overview of work programme performance

Customer and Community Services work programme

18. In the Customer and Community Services work programme, there are 128 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2022 (green), 14 activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), 5 activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red) and 3 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2022 (grey). Activities with significant impact are discussed below:

Table 3: Customer and Community Services activities with significant impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation and mitigation
Wai-o-Manu Reserve development	Red	In progress	The draft operational management plan was to have been presented to the Joint Management Committee in July 2022 for approval. Timelines have changed and the draft needs to be workshopped with the local board before being formally approved at a business meeting by the new local board in early 2023
Big Bay Reserve - renew coastal assets	Red	In progress	The final report has been submitted to staff for review and the outcome will be presented to the local board for approval to proceed to detailed design
Sunkist Bay Reserve-renew Park assets	Red	In progress	Due to inter-dependencies of design and consenting it is necessary to include the design in a single project with the existing contract for seawall design. The next steps are to produce a combined preliminary design which will be submitted to mana whenua for feedback and then proceed to resource consent
Sunkist Bay Reserve - renew seawall	Red	In progress	Due to inter-dependencies of design and consenting it is necessary to include the design in a single project with renewal of parks assets. The next steps are to produce a combined preliminary design which will be submitted to mana whenua for feedback and then proceed to resource consent
Waiuku War Memorial Town Hall - renew interior and repair roof	Red	In progress	Asbestos has been detected in various places within the hall which requires removal. The next step is to establish scope and cost of asbestos removal works and issue a tender for physical works.
Review and implementation of the Franklin Sport and Active Recreation Facilities Plan	Amber	In progress	The refresh of the plan was workshopped with the local board on 5 July 2022 to be presented to the 23 August business meeting following minor adjustments.
CARRY FORWARD FR: Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming of parks and places) tranche two	Amber	In progress	Naming is underway on 76 sites. Timelines are being finalised with iwi.
CARRY FORWARD FR: Te Kete Rukuruku (Māori naming of parks and places) Tranche One	Amber	In progress	Tranche one names adopted, with a whakarewatanga organised for Taahuna Kaitoto / Sandspit Reserve in August
Franklin Local Parks Management Plan	Amber	In progress	No activity during this quarter with the project overdue to commence
Clarks Beach and adjoining accesses - renew steps and fences	Amber	In progress	Mana whenua iwi have begun providing feedback with the next steps to select and appoint a designer who will design the replacement structures
Clarks Beach Recreation Reserve and Golf Club - upgrade skate park, playground and land fixtures	Amber	In progress	A play equipment suite has been selected and ordered in anticipation of price increases and long delivery times. Engagement with mana whenua is continuing around specific details. Continued development of the design for the skatepark, playground, toilets and the basketball court is ongoing
Kawakawa Bay boat club - investigate and renew boat ramp pontoon piles	Amber	In progress	The detailed design has been completed for accessway construction for replacement of the pontoons, however timing is dependent on approval of final designs and budget. The current estimate is that a contractor will be appointed by September 2022
Maraetai Park - upgrade junior play space	Amber	In progress	Professional services contract has been awarded and staff to meet with iwi to review the design. Drawings will then be shared with stakeholders
Pukekohe War Memorial Town Hall - renew heritage assets	Amber	In progress	Building identified as being earthquake prone, containing asbestos material and weathertightness issue. The heritage architect designer has been selected for investigation for full scoping, and design. The structural engineer has been selected for detailed retrofit design. Delivery is expected to commence in financial year 2023 and continue in financial year 2024.
Pukekohe-Paerata Paths Plan - develop delivery programme	Amber	In progress	The implementation study is underway and the community is involved. Once completed, the study and report findings will be given to the local board.
Puriri Road Reserve - replace access	Amber	On hold	Project is funded beginning of financial year 2023 with investigation and design work started
Te Puru Park - develop concept plan	Amber	In progress	Cultural Values Assessment to be completed from iwi who do not support any digging onsite
Te Puru Park - renew skate park	Amber	On hold	Community Facilities are waiting for further direction and assessment on relocation of skate park as part of the master plan.
Umupuia Coastal Reserve-upgrade Park assets	Amber	Approved	Engagement with iwi is ongoing to resolve basic concept plans

Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme

19. In the Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme, there are 11 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2022 (green), no activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), no activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red) and 2 activities that have been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2022 (grey).

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme

20. In the Tātaki Auckland Unlimited work programme, there are 3 activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2022 (green), no activities that are in progress but are delayed (amber), no activities that are significantly delayed, on hold or not delivered (red) and no activities that have been cancelled and deferred in the period April to June 2022 (grey).

Deferred activities

21. The Lead Financial Advisors are identifying projects from the local board’s 2021/2022 Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) operational budget which meet the criteria to be carried forward. These will be added to the work programme to be delivered in 2022/2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

22. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

23. The local board has invested in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

· The C.R.E.S.T Programme: A number of possum and rat control programmes underway – such as Clarks Beach Golf Club, Owens farm on Taihiki, Gower farms native riparian planting and planning for the 2023 dotterels season. Plans for engagement with the Elletts Beach community are underway. Planning underway for both local hub days and year end BBQ at the Clarks Beach Yacht Club.

· Finding Franklin Bats - Te rapu nga pekapeka o Franklin: During quarter four, 3 bat surveys were completed on private properties across the Franklin area through collaboration between Te Ara Hīkoi, Auckland Council, landowners and EcoQuest. Areas covered were in the Manukau lowlands, the Friends of Te Wairoa catchment area (Hūnua to Clevedon and Maraetai) and the Āwhitu peninsula with the survey period between January and April 2022. EcoQuest are now processing and analysing the data to assess bat activity across the region. Results have included recorded findings of bats, for the first time, on the Āwhitu Peninsula, and high levels of activity around the Patumāhoe/Glenbrook area. The full report of the findings will be accessible to all stakeholders in the project.

· Manukau Harbour Forum: Coordinator work through quarter four included further updates on the terms of reference and website updating. An induction pack will be developed for new forum members in the next term. The youth sustainability leadership wānanga was delivered in April 2022 with 46 students from 21 schools attending. A specialist has been sourced to work through requirements for a mana whenua iwi engagement hui.

· Franklin Industrial Pollution Prevention Programme – Pukekohe: A brochure has been created and completed in preparation of engagement with Pukekohe businesses. Face-to-face visits in the Pukekohe business education programme commenced in late June. After information has been put together, a workshop will be scheduled with the board to discuss and share the results.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

25. This report informs the Franklin Local Board of the performance for Quarter Four ending 30 June 2022 and the performance for the 2021/2022 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. This report includes Franklin Local Board of the activities that have a direct Māori outcome focus as follows:

· Whakatipu i te reo Māori - we grow the Māori language and celebrating te ao Māori and strengthening responsiveness to Māori: Te Reo continues to be used throughout all aspects of service, including online mediums and onsite marketing. Highlights include activations as part of Matariki where Tātai Whakapapa workshops were held at both Waiuku Library and Pukekohe Library for the public to learn more about their heritage.

· Youth Economy (Youth Connections) – Franklin: Te Ara Rangatahi delivered Mahia te Mahi - rangatahi opportunities, employment and education programme for 20 rangatahi for the local board’s $50,000 funding. The programme has enabled 12 rangatahi gaining meaningful employment and an additional seven rangatahi that have been supported to (re)engage in education or training.

· Te Korowai o Papatūānuku: Expansion works at the Āwhitu Landcare Nursery have been completed. Over 14,000 plants have been allocated for four sites of cultural significance to Ngāti Te Ata. An initial 3,000 plants have been planted at Waipipi by whānau and Āwhitu Landcare. Waiuku College will join future planting at this site. Whānau and community plantings are planned at Reretēwhioi Marae, Tahurangatira, and Tahuna Pā. A Tahuna Pā community planting day is being organised and once a date is confirmed local board members will be invited to attend. Ngāti Te Ata, West Coast Bush Services, are facilitating planting days and carrying out maintenance, fencing, site prep, and laying out plants, as a part of these days. This year with the completed expansion works there has been an increase in plants produced by Āwhitu Landcare Nursery from 15,000 per year (prior to this project) to 80,000 this year.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. This report is provided to enable the Franklin Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2021/2022 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

28. Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, the Council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or around 30 August 2022.

29. Due to these obligations the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is under confidential cover.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Overview of work programme performance’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. Work programmes for 2022/2023 were approved at the board’s business meeting in June 2022.

32. Deferral of budgets of unfinished activities will be added into 2022/2023 work programmes by quarter one reporting

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Franklin Q4 Work programme update (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	CONFIDENTIAL Franklin Financial report year ended June 2022 - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Orrin Kapua - Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Chairperson	Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Angela Fulljames
Members	Malcolm Bell
	Alan Cole
	Sharlene Druyven
	Amanda Kinzett
	Matthew Murphy
	Logan Soole

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	5 July 2022 Franklin Local Board workshop record	279
b ⇩	12 July 2022 Franklin Local Board workshop record	283
c ⇩	26 July 2022 Franklin Local Board workshop record	285

Author	Lucy Stallworthy - Local Board Engagement Advisor
Authoriser	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura