Agenda of Henderson-Massey Local Board - Tuesday, 6 December 2022

1 Nau mai | Welcome

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

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

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

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

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) confirm the inaugural minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 1 November 2022, as true and correct.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

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

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

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

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

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

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations

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

8.1 Deputation: Maggie Gray and Timothy van der Werff - Food Truck Collective

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from Maggie Gray and Timothy van der Werff.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Maggie Gray and Timothy van der Werff (founders of Food Truck Collective) will introduce the Food Truck Collective. It aims to support and connect the local Henderson-Massey communities and small businesses with our events, namely the Te Atatu Night Markets.

3. The Food Truck Collective are an events organisation passionate about showcasing the best street food in Auckland and connecting communities with memorable experiences.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on the Food Truck Collective and thank Maggie Gray and Timothy van der Werff for their attendance.

8.2 Deputation: Fern Maxwell - Communication accessibility in public playgrounds

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from Fern Maxwell.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Mrs Fern Maxwell, Clinical Lead – Speech Language Therapist, TalkLink Trust – Northern region will present to the Board on communication accessibility in public playgrounds.

3. The TalkLink Trust is an NGO and has been operating since 1991. The TalkLink team are specialists in the area of Communication Assistive Technology / Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC). AAC tools and strategies are used to supplement or replace speech or writing for those with impairments in the production or comprehension of spoken or written language. www.talklink.org.nz

4. Communication accessibility in public playgrounds. Across West Auckland is fortunate to have a variety of playgrounds for tamariki to access, many of which have accessibility features for items such as wheelchairs, to enable tamariki with physical disability to enjoy and engage in play. However, a significant portion of our community have communication disabilities and struggle to communicate effectively with their peers and/or adults supporting them. Across the motu, more and more large communication boards appear in public playgrounds, making it a place for all tamariki to access and enjoy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on communication accessibility in public playgrounds and thank Fern Maxwell, on behalf of the TalkLink Trust, for her attendance.

8.3 Deputation: Ian Wood - Dog control, Marae for Te Atatu Peninsula and Harbourview Orangihina Park Plan

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from Ian Wood.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Ian Wood, Te Atatu Peninsula resident, will present to the Board on the following:

i) Dog control / access and the relevant signage is an issue for northern and eastern coastline of Te Atatu Peninsula.

ii) Marae for Te Atatu Peninsula

iii) Implementing the Harbourview Orangihina Park Plan.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation dog control, marae for Te Atatu Peninsula and the Harbourview Orangihina Park Plan implementation and thank Ian Wood for his attendance.

8.4 Deputation: David Tanenui - Te Atatu Marae

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a deputation from David Tanenui.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. David Tanenui will present to the Board on the Te Atatu Marae.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on Te Atatu Marae and thank David Tanenui for his attendance.

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum

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

9.1 Public Forum: West Auckland Boxing Academy - update

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive a public forum from West Auckland Boxing Academy.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Matt Grey, founder and director and Levi Hohua coach and youth worker, on behalf of West Auckland Boxing Academy, will be in attendance to present on the future possibilities for the Academy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) receive the presentation on the future possibilities of West Auckland Boxing Academy and thank Matt Grey and Levi Hohua for their attendance.

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Adoption of a business meeting schedule

File No.: CP2022/15539

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Henderson-Massey Local Board meeting schedule for the period February 2023 to September 2025.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules. In particular, clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Sections 46, 46A and 47 in Part 7 of LGOIMA require that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting, and that local board meetings are open to the public.

3. Adopting a meeting schedule helps with meeting these requirements. It also allows for a planned approach to workloads and ensures that local board members have clarity about their commitments.

4. A draft meeting schedule for the period February 2023 to September 2025 has been developed and is included below for adoption by the local board.

5. Frequency: One business meeting per month (excluding January) is sufficient for formal business to be considered. There are some instances for which the local board may need to have additional meetings for important decisions such as local board plans, local board agreements or to provide input into regional strategies, policies and plans. Local board meeting schedules will be updated with any additional meetings once those details are confirmed. Outside of its scheduled meetings, local boards can call extraordinary and/or emergency meetings as and when required.

6. Timing: The standard practice in previous terms is to hold the monthly ordinary meeting in the final half of the month (weeks three or four) which enables local boards to prepare for any workshop items for these meetings in the first half of the month.

7. Commencing the business meeting during business hours will enable meetings to be productive, maximise access to staff and ensures best use of resources.

8. Location: Having the meetings in a set location ensures consistency and ability to use technology that is built into council facilities as required. This can include the use of screens, speakers and Wi-Fi connections that enable remote attendance.

9. Recess weeks: While this report does not recommend the formal adoption of workshops, it does recommend the formal adoption of recess weeks. Recess weeks are weeks where the local board agrees that it will conduct no business and allow members to take leave. They are scheduled so as not to coincide with meetings, but they impact on workshops and on the ability to call an extraordinary meeting. Adopting recess weeks enables members to plan leave in advance more easily.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) adopt the meeting schedule outlined below for the period February 2023 to September 2025:

DATE	TIME	VENUE
Business Meetings: 2023 Tuesday, 21 February 2023 Tuesday, 21 March 2023 Tuesday, 18 April 2023 Tuesday, 16 May 2023 Tuesday, 20 June 2023 Tuesday, 18 July 2023 Tuesday, 15 August 2023 Tuesday, 19 September 2023 Tuesday, 17 October 2023 Tuesday, 21 November 2023 Tuesday, 5 December 2023	10.00am	Council Chamber, Civic Building, 1 Smythe Road, Henderson
Business Meetings: 2024 Tuesday, 20 February 2024 Tuesday, 19 March 2024 Tuesday, 16 April 2024 Tuesday, 21 May 2024 Tuesday, 18 June 2024 Tuesday, 16 July 2024 Tuesday, 20 August 2024 Tuesday, 17 September 2024 Tuesday, 15 October 2024 Tuesday, 19 November 2024 Tuesday, 3 December 2024	10.00am	Council Chamber, Civic Building, 1 Smythe Road, Henderson
Business Meetings: 2025 Tuesday, 18 February 2025 Tuesday, 18 March 2025 Tuesday, 15 April 2025 Tuesday, 20 May 2025 Tuesday, 17 June 2025 Tuesday, 15 July 2025 Tuesday, 19 August 2025 Tuesday, 16 September 2025	10.00am	Council Chamber, Civic Building, 1 Smythe Road, Henderson

b) agree to hold recess weeks for the 2022-2025 electoral term as follows:

i) 11-14 April 2023

10-14 July 2023

9-13 October 2023

ii) 22-26 April 2024

8-12 July 2024

5-11 October 2024

iii) 21-25 April 2025

6-11 July 2025.

c) approve the scheduling of an extraordinary meeting on 7 February 2023, for the Annual Budget 2023/2024 - local consultation content, at 10.00am to be held at the Council Chamber, Civic Building L2, 1 Smythe Road, Henderson.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Appointments to external organisations

File No.: CP2022/15537

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To appoint elected members to external organisations and agree the process for appointing the single local board representative to the Local Government New Zealand National Council.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local boards have a statutory responsibility to communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within their local board area. These organisations range from business associations, statutory organisations, trusts, to entities for which the council has the right to appoint directors (known as council organisations (COs). Elected members are often invited to participate in these external organisations in various capacities.

3. This report provides detail about these various categories of appointments to external organisations to inform appointments by the local board.

4. Attachment A to this report provides details of the external organisations that have existing arrangements with the local board or for which a relationship is prescribed in policy, such as business associations running Business Improvement District (BID) programmes. Local boards are being asked to make appointments to these organisations at this time and to consider any further appointments as part of their local board engagement plan and strategy for the term.

5. Local boards are also collectively required to appoint a single representative (to represent all 21 local boards) to the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) National Council, to fill one of three seats provided for Auckland Council. This report recommends a process for making a joint appointment.

6. Staff recommend that local boards consider appointing a lead and an alternate for various organisations for the 2022-2025 triennium. The function of alternate representative is to act as a backup to and to perform the appointee duties, including attendance at meetings, in the appointee’s absence.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) kopou / appoint a representative and alternate to each of the external organisations listed in the table below for the 2022-2025 triennium.

External organisation	Lead	Alternate
Massey Matters
Central Park Business Association
Heart of Te Atatu South
Ranui Advisory Group
Te Atatu Peninsula Business Association
Waitakere Ethnic Board
Waitakere Healthlink
Te Whau Pathway Trust

b) tautapa / delegate authority to the chairperson to work with other local board chairpersons to form a selection panel to appoint a local board representative to the LGNZ National Council as soon as possible.

Horopaki

Context

7. Participation in community organisations is an established part of an elected member's role and having a relationship with community organisations and interest groups is an important part of the local board role.

8. Several external organisations provide for the formal participation of representatives of the Auckland Council in their affairs. These can include arrangements via:

· a trust deed that provides for a council representative on an organisation’s board, committee, or other function

· provisions in law, policy or resource consent that require council representative arrangements. For example, a regulation providing for a community liaison committee or a resource consent requiring the formation of a committee with elected member representation

· other partnerships or associations entered into by the council which provide for elected member representation.

9. These arrangements often include other duties depending on the organisation, the nature of that organisation’s work and/or the relationship with the council.

Council organisations (COs) and other formal arrangements

10. Council organisations (COs) are companies or entities in which Council has the right to appoint 1 or more of the trustees, directors, or managers (however described) of the company or entity, but Council has less than 50% control. An ‘entity’ includes any partnership, trust, arrangement for the sharing of profits, union of interest, co-operation, joint venture, or other similar arrangement; but does not include a committee or joint committee of a local authority.

11. There are various other entities that have been set up for a specific purpose some of which are formal documents such as a resource consent. These includes consultative groups such as the Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group, community forums, community impact forums (Department of Corrections) and others.

12. External organisations relevant to the local board are listed in Attachment A.

Representatives to business associations with Business Improvement District (BID) programmes

13. Business associations are independent organisations that are governed by their own constitutions but often work closely with the council because of the roles they play and interest in local business communities (town and commercial centres).

14. Some business associations participate in Auckland Council’s BID programme – which sets a framework to provide BID-operating business associations (BIDs) with BID targeted rate funding, so those business associations can act for the benefit of the specified business area. Business associations that operate a BID programme are also required to work with Auckland Council to ensure there is accountability for the BID targeted rates collected by the council.

15. Auckland Council’s BID Policy 2022 sets the framework for governance, accountability, and management of the BID programmes. The BID Policy outlines the role of the local boards and the local board representative in relation to BIDs. It recognises that within Auckland Council, local boards are the primary relationship lead with BIDs.

16. Local boards have allocated decision-making responsibilities relating to BID programmes, including, but not limited to:

· advising on BID programme strategic direction (with the business association) and providing feedback to the business association regarding its annual BID programme presentation to the local board

· approving establishment of new BID programme and boundary area within the parameters set by the Auckland Council BID policy

· approval of any changes or amendments to an existing BID programme boundary area

· recommending to the Governing Body BID programme targeted rate grant amounts and proposed changes to a BID targeted rate mechanism.

17. To manage the relationship with BIDs and ensure adequate information sharing between local boards and these entities, the BID Policy provide that local boards will appoint a local board to represent the local board and liaise (with the BID) on their behalf.

18. The local board representative role supports the governance-to-governance relationship between the two organisations and is not operationally focused. Only the local board representative, or the alternate representative if the appointed representative is not available, may represent the local board at BID executive committee and General Meetings, but this does not prohibit BIDs from engaging with other local board members. Depending on the relationship, between the parties, the involvement of local board representatives on business associations may go further to include:

· an invitation that the local board representative be appointed to the business association executive committee with speaking rights

· bestowal of voting rights by the business association on the local board’s representative. The bestowal of voting rights is not recommended. This is to avoid any conflicts of interests (real or perceived), or disputes between the local board and the BID. However, provided the BID and the local board representative are comfortable that risks can be managed, the BID Policy does not prevent this.

Other business associations not running BID programmes

19. Often other business associations who are not running BID programmes find that having a dedicated liaison is helpful. This is especially useful if the business association intends to join the BID programme in the future. In that regard, local boards are encouraged to appoint a liaison representative, and an alternate if desired, for all business associations in its area.

20. The list of business associations relevant to this local board is included in Attachment A.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) National Council

21. The LGNZ Rules were amended in 2019 to remove Auckland Council from Zone 1 and to provide for Auckland’s representation at the National Council. Given its sheer size and shared governance structure, Auckland will now operate as its own LGNZ ‘zone’ and of its three seats on the LGNZ National Council, one is earmarked for a representative that is appointed by the 21 local boards. The other seats are filled by the Mayor of Auckland (or his alternate) and a representative to be appointed by the Governing Body.

22. The LGNZ rules require appointments to the National Council to be made within eight weeks of the triennial local government elections.

23. In 2019, local boards agreed to delegate authority to the local board chairpersons and the 21 chairpersons formed a selection panel to appoint a single representative of the local boards to the LGNZ National Council. This process enabled a representative to be appointed within the necessary time and was an efficient and appropriate process for making shared decisions.

24. Staff are recommending a similar process for this term, whereby local boards delegate to chairpersons the power to form a selection panel and for the selection panel to collectively to make the LGNZ National Council representative selection at their meeting in early December 2022.

Appointments for the purpose of managing relationships and communications

25. The Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 specifically provides that a local board must communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within its local board area (section 13(2)(c)). In the past few terms, some local boards appointed dedicated leads to manage these relationships and ensure good communication lines with specific organisations and interest groups. These members act as a liaison between the local board and these organisations or groups.

26. While appointing representatives is one way to maintain good relationships and open communication, it is important that this is not done in isolation from the work of the local board during the term. In that regard, staff consider that a conversation about the local boards engagement plan for the term can best inform decisions on appointments that are made purely for the purpose of engagement and communications. This would ensure there is strategic value in these appointments and that there is a clear distinction from other appointments being recommended in this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

27. The appointments outlined in this report are not all similar and the responsibilities and duties of an elected member will vary depending on the type of appointment and organisation. Key considerations for appointment decisions should include:

Ensuring appointees have the capacity and skills to undertake the responsibilities

28. This report attempts to outline the differences between the various appointments so that potential nominees can assess if they are the right fit. Some of the roles require members to represent the interests of the Council or perform governance functions. Others may require a lot of time commitment for meetings.

29. A great deal of appointments require attendance of members at either monthly or quarterly meetings of these external organisations.

30. Elected members are encouraged to consider taking on responsibilities only if they can commit to the time and effort that is required.

31. Any other additional considerations will be included in the list in Attachment A.

Managing conflicts of interests

32. The primary role of elected members appointed to external organisations is representing the council. However, depending on their activities, these arrangements may impact their decision-making role within the council.

33. Conflicts of interest can sometimes arise in relation to such appointments, for example where the appointment involves a legal duty to act in the organisation’s best interest (e.g. as a director or trustee). A conflict may also arise where the appointed representatives become heavily involved and very invested in the affairs and decisions relating to that external organisation. In these situations, a conflict could arise when the local board is making certain types of decision in relation to the other organisation.

34. In order to reduce the risk of conflicts, elected members should not take part in the management of these organisations. Unless there is a specific arrangement otherwise, the role as an appointee should be confined to attending meetings, voting at annual or general meetings and acting as a conduit of information.

35. From 20 November 2022 new amendments to the Local Government Act 2002 come into force and require elected members to make a pecuniary interest return within 120 days of coming into office and before the last day of February in subsequent years, which includes declaring all appointments that a member has by virtue of being an elected member. Having an interest does not necessarily mean there is a conflict, but it is important to be mindful of any perceptions of conflict if elected members are actively involved with community groups, even in their official capacity.

Accountability

36. Appointed representatives are strongly encouraged to make regular reports to the local board on their activities and as appropriate, progress made by that organisation on key issues that is relevant to the local board and council.

Official capacity

37. Elected representatives are delegated representation roles in their capacity as elected local board members. Should they cease to become an elected member, their appointment would be automatically repealed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38. This decision is procedural in nature and is not expected to result in any increase to greenhouse gas emissions nor will it be adversely impacted by the predicted effects of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

39. Auckland Council staff support local boards in programmes and partnerships involving business associations and other external organisations that may be covered in this report.

40. Staff in the Governance Division provide support to members who are involved with the LGNZ National Council.

41. Other than that, these appointment decisions facilitate positive relationships with key partners and are not expected to have any significant adverse impact on the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

42. Local boards are generally committed to nurturing and maintaining relationships with key stakeholders. This report and recommendations align with what local boards want.

43. There may be an interest in making more appointments or arrangements of this nature for the purpose of managing relationships and ensuring key community groups have dedicated liaisons that make their engagement with the local board easier. Staff are supportive of this approach, however, in order to ensure these arrangements are meaningful and useful, the local board is strongly encouraged to consider making any additional appointments in the context of a discussion about its engagement strategy for the term.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44. This is a procedural decision that is not considered to have specific implications for Māori. Where relevant, any specific arrangements for Māori co-governance and co-management entities will be addressed in a dedicated report.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. The decision to appoint elected members to outside organisations is procedural in nature so does not have any financial implications.

46. Where financial decisions relating to these external organisations are taken, the implications of those decisions and these appointments, where appropriate and relevant, will be assessed accordingly.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

47. There are some reputational risks that may arise if elected members appointed to external organisations do not meet the expectations for their role. These include attendance at meetings and making themselves available or accessible to the groups to which they are appointed. To manage these risks, elected members are encouraged to carefully consider these roles and requirements and only take these commitments on if they can honour them.

48. To mitigate the risk of actual and perceived conflicts when can undermine decisions of the council, elected members are required to include the appointments made in this report in their annual declarations.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

49. Once appointed, staff will prepare correspondence from the chairperson to these external organisations introducing the new local board and informing them of the appointed representatives for their organisation.

50. Following the delegation of authority to the chairperson, provided all local boards agree to this recommendation, staff will bring the matter of the LGNZ National Council appointment to the next meeting of local board chairpersons for a decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	External organisations summary	23

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wendy Kjestrup - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Arrangements for making urgent decisions

File No.: CP2022/15538

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse a decision-making arrangement for use by the local board when urgent decisions are required but it is not practicable to convene a meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local boards hold decision-making meetings as regularly as they consider appropriate to discharge their responsibilities. A monthly (ordinary) meeting schedule helps staff schedule reports and decisions during the term and ensures elected members' attendance. When a need for an urgent decision arises outside of this schedule, the law allows for extraordinary or emergency meetings.

3. Extraordinary meetings require the chief executive to provide each local board member with three working days’ notice (or if the meeting is called by resolution, within a lesser period of notice as specified in the resolution, being not less than 24 hours). Emergency meetings require the person calling the meeting (or a person acting on their behalf) to provide 24 hours of notice to local board members and the chief executive. Extraordinary or emergency meetings are often not practicable to organise, and the short notice period may result in failure to achieve a quorum. In these circumstances, an arrangement for decision-making without a meeting is necessary to enable the local board to deal efficiently with urgent matters.

4. In the last few terms, all 21 local boards adopted an urgent decision-making arrangement which consisted of a conditional delegation to the chairperson and deputy chairperson to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board when it cannot meet to make them. The exercise of this delegation has previously been subject to authorisation, to confirm that the decision requested is urgent and that it is not practicable to call an extraordinary or emergency meeting.

5. Staff recommend that this process is adopted in the current term for use as and when required.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) delegate authority to the chairperson and deputy chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board, if the local board is unable to meet

b) confirm that the Local Area Manager, chairperson, and deputy chairperson (or any person/s acting in these roles) will authorise the use of the local board’s urgent decision mechanism by approving the request for an urgent decision in writing

c) note that all urgent decisions made, including written advice which supported these decisions, will be included on the agenda of the next ordinary meeting of the local board.

Horopaki

Context

6. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) provides that a local authority must hold the meetings it needs for the good government of its area.

7. The LGA also provides that local boards may delegate to committees, other subordinate decision-making bodies, staff, or members of the local board any of its responsibilities and powers for the purposes of efficiency and effectiveness in the conduct of local board business.

8. The LGA clarifies that some local board decisions are not able to be delegated, including the duty to identify and communicate the interests and preferences of the people in its local board area in relation to the content of the strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of Auckland Council (clause 36D, schedule 7 LGA).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Urgent Decisions delegation

9. The recommended arrangement is one that local boards have had in place over the past few terms. This arrangement has generally worked well to enable responsiveness to situations requiring decisions that arise over the Christmas/New Year holiday period, emergency decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic, and other unforeseen circumstances. This mechanism has enabled timely submissions to central government consultations, something that is usually subject to very constrained timeframes.

10. The urgent decision-making arrangements involve a delegation to the chairperson and deputy chairperson (subject to the authorisation process set out below), to make urgent decisions required before the next meeting if it is not practicable to hold an extraordinary or emergency meeting.

Authorisation

11. The delegation to make urgent decisions is subject to authorisation. The authorisers will approve the use of the urgent decision mechanism if they are satisfied that:

a) the decision is required urgently, i.e., before the next planned meeting of the local board and

b) it is not practicable in the circumstances to call an extraordinary or emergency meeting of the local board.

12. The authorisers will include the chairperson, deputy chairperson and the Local Area Manager (or their nominee). Their considerations should include the significance of the decision, including whether this is likely to be controversial or not, and the ability to meet statutory and logistical requirements for an extraordinary or emergency meeting in the particular circumstances.

Request for urgent decision

13. Requests for an urgent decision should outline:

a) the decisions or resolutions sought

b) the nature of the issue

c) the reason for urgency.

Decision-making requirements

14. Elected members exercising the urgent decision delegation must make their decision in accordance with the decision-making principles and requirements in the LGA and Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and they must determine the best way to fulfil the requirements laid out in that legislation. These requirements include:

· identifying and assessing all reasonably practicable options for achieving the decision’s purpose and assessing those options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages (s 77 LGA)

· if it is a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, considering the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga (s 77(1)(c) LGA)

· considering the views and preferences of people likely to be affected by, or have an interest in, the decision (s 78 LGA).

15. Elected members require quality advice to inform good decisions. Where the request for an urgent decision has come from staff, staff should provide their advice in the Auckland Council report format. It may not always be possible for staff to produce comprehensive reports within constrained timeframes, so in such circumstances they should endeavour to provide sufficient information in an appropriate format, such as a memorandum.

Public accountability

16. Urgent decisions made under delegated authority should be published on the agenda of the next ordinary meeting of the local board. The information to be published must include the urgent decision and all relevant information provided to the decision-makers, provided it is not confidential.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. This decision is procedural in nature and is not affected by climate impacts nor will it result in any changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

18. The urgent decision mechanism enables urgent decisions to be made in a timely manner and this makes it a useful tool for responding to any climate change-related emergency.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. The urgent decision-making mechanism proposed in this report enables the council group to respond to situations requiring urgent decisions in a timely manner when it is not practical to call the full local board together.

20. These decisions include, for example, local board input to council submissions that are provided whenever there is a central government consultation. The timeframes for these submissions can be very constrained and it is crucial that local board input is provided sooner rather than later, so that it can be considered by the Governing Body (or its committees) who adopt the submission on behalf of Auckland Council.

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

Local impacts and local board views

21. This report outlines the local board urgent decision-making arrangement that can be used when it is not practical to call the full local board together.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22. This report concerns a procedural matter and is not considered to have any specific implications for Māori.

23. When making urgent decisions under the delegation, decision makers will need to consider the impact of each decision on Māori, their land and other taonga, as appropriate.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. There are no financial implications arising from the procedural decision sought through this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. The authorisation step provides an opportunity to assess and confirm the urgency and to decide if it is practicable to have an extraordinary or emergency meeting. This step is intended to help ensure the delegation to the chairperson and deputy chairperson is used in appropriate circumstances.

26. The chairperson and deputy chairperson are strongly encouraged to seek views from other local board members when making urgent decisions to ensure the urgent decision reflects those views to the extent possible.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. If the local board adopts the urgent decision-making mechanism proposed in this report, this will provide a process that will be used as and when required.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Local board appointments and delegations for the 2022-2025 electoral term

File No.: CP2022/15542

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend that the local board make internal appointments and delegations to manage its workload and enable the discharge of duties and responsibilities in a timely manner.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local boards are responsible for a wide range of council decisions. As per their legislative role, most of these decisions relate to non-regulatory responsibilities of the council allocated to local boards.

3. In the first term of Auckland Council, all 21 local boards (and the Governing Body) made a general delegation to the Chief Executive of all their responsibilities, duties and powers subject to the exclusions, restrictions and clarifications set out in the Chief Executive’s Delegations Register. The exercise of responsibilities, duties and powers delegated from local boards is subject to the Local Board Delegation Protocols (The Protocols). The Protocols require a range of decisions to be reported to the local board and require that certain decisions made by staff be subject to consultation with the local board, through a nominated local board member (or portfolio holder).

4. Local boards have also been delegated some decisions relating to regulatory processes from the Governing Body. These include giving input into the resource consent process and making objections to liquor licence applications. Some of these decisions are subject to statutory timeframes so having individual members take the lead on such matters ensures the local board can participate effectively in these processes.

5. To enable effective and efficient decision-making, it is appropriate that individual members undertake the following duties and responsibilities:

a) Provision of local board views and feedback during staff consultation on general landowner approvals

b) Provision of local board views and feedback during staff consultation on activities that are subject to regulatory approval e.g film applications and events

c) Provision of formal feedback on resource consent-related matters, specifically input into resource consent notification decisions and provision of local board views, if any, on publicly notified resource consents; includes providing views, if required, on any council decisions relating to the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020

d) Preparation of and submission of objections, if any, to liquor licence applications and authority to speak at relevant hearings, if required

e) Representation at meetings of joint committees, working groups and other bodies which the local board is a party of or invited to.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) kopou / appoint a nominated contact, and an alternate, for staff consultations over landowner approval applications (excluding applications for filming and events)

b) kopou / appoint a nominated contact, and an alternate, for staff consultation on applications for filming, events and other activities on local parks and local facilities that also require regulatory approval

c) tuhi ā-taipiopito / note that Screen Auckland will be consulting the nominated contact for only high impact film shoot permit applications and/or which have been specified by the local board in its August 2022 resolutions (HM/2022/1)

d) kopou / appoint a lead, and an alternate, for liquor licence matters and delegate authority to that member, including any alternate, to prepare and provide objections, if any, and speak to any local board views at any hearings on applications for liquor licences

e) kopou / appoint a lead, and an alternate, on resource consent matters and delegate authority to that member, including any alternate, to:

i) provide the local board views, if any, on whether a resource consent should proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application

ii) prepare and provide local board’s views, if any, on notified resource consents and speak to those views at any hearings if required

iii) provide the local board’s views on matters relating to or generated by the COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 while this legislation remains in force.

f) kopou / appoint a representative, and an alternate, to meetings of the Local Government New Zealand Auckland Zone and to take the lead on matters relating to this forum

g) tautapa / delegate authority to the chairperson to work with other local board chairpersons to select shared representatives to council working groups, working parties and other internal bodies, where there is a limited number of local board representatives to be selected from amongst all 21 or clusters of local boards

Horopaki

Context

6. To enable the effective and efficient conduct of a local board’s business, the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) provides that a local board may delegate to a committee, subcommittee, or member of the local board, or to an officer of council, any of its responsibilities, duties, or powers, except for the exceptions listed in clause 36D, schedule 7 of the Act. The responsibilities that cannot be delegated include the duty to identify and communicate the interests and preferences of the people in the local board area in relation to the content of the strategies, policies, plans and bylaws of Auckland Council.

7. It is standard practice for local boards to delegate responsibilities for specific tasks and duties to individual members, to enable those tasks and duties to be discharged in a timely manner.

8. Local boards have also made general delegations to the Chief Executive which enable staff to make a range of other decisions on behalf of the local board. Some decisions delegated to the Chief Executive are conditional on consultation with the local board, so this report includes appointments of representatives with whom staff can consult and seek local board views from.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. Local boards have been allocated decision-making responsibility for various non-regulatory activities including the use of and activities within local parks and local community and recreation facilities. Considering and determining requests by the public and other third parties for the use of these parks and facilities is therefore within the allocated responsibilities of Local Boards. Auckland Council refers to these decisions as “landowner consents” or “landowner approvals”.

10. Through the general delegation to the Chief Executive, all local boards have delegated landowner approval decisions to staff subject to consultation with the local board. This enables this customer-facing process to be administered efficiently.

11. The Protocols provide that the nominated local board member can request staff (who are undertaking the consultation) to refer the landowner approval applications to a local board business meeting for a decision. This approach is typically exercised sparingly and in relation to controversial issues of particular interest to the Local Board or local community. Referring the matter to the local board for decision adds a considerable amount of time and resource to the process as it requires staff to follow the reporting timeframes for business meetings and slows down council’s response to the customer.

12. Separately Auckland Council takes regulatory decisions in relation to applications made under its Bylaws and the Resource Management Act 1991. Regulatory decisions sit with the Governing Body and are often delegated to staff or to independent commissioners. Before taking decisions, the Governing Body must consider the views and preferences expressed by a local board where the decisions affect the local board area.

13. This report recommends the appointment of local board members to take the lead on providing these approvals and views.

General landowner approvals

14. The role of the local board’s nominated lead for general landowner approvals is to be the point of consultation for staff. The lead’s responsibility is to:

· receive information about the proposed activity which requires landowner approval

· provide views, if any, about the impact of the proposal on the local park and the local community

· maintain a focus on governance matters noting that staff who maintain the park and undertake operational duties will be identifying the relevant operational issues

· ensure that reasons are given to support the views based on relevant and not irrelevant considerations

· consult other members of the local board, if appropriate, and collate their feedback, if any, to give to staff

· provide views, if any, in a timely manner (staff recommend nominated leads strive to provide feedback within five days, if possible) and,

· provide regular updates to the local board on landowner approval applications received as appropriate.

15. The exercise of council’s general powers to make landowner decisions is not unconstrained. Whether taken by staff or at the full local board level, decision-makers must ensure decisions are made in accordance with statutory and common and public law principles.

Filming

16. Screen Auckland (part of Tātaki Auckland Unlimited) is the agency in charge of permitting applications for filming in the Auckland region. They also facilitate the request for landowner approvals relating to film applications.

17. Due to recent growth in screen industry activity, Screen Auckland is now processing approximately 1000 permit applications per year. This number is predicted to continue to increase as the film industry recovers from COVID-19 restrictions.

18. Screen Auckland’s service level commitment is to process film applications within three to five working days. These timeframes reflect the nature of this industry and is in line with the ‘film-friendly’ direction in the Auckland Film Protocols but it adds pressure to internal consultation processes.

19. The recommended timeframe, for consulting with local boards on filming applications, is two working days. These tight timeframes also mean that referring the matter to the full local board will most likely result in cancellation of the application as applicants will likely opt for a different location. Therefore, to meet council’s service level commitments, local boards are encouraged not to refer film applications to the full local board for consideration.

20. The role of the local board’s film lead is to be the point of consultation for staff processing applications for film permits on local parks. The lead’s responsibility is to:

· receive information about filming applications on local parks

· provide views, if any, on how the activity may impact the local park and local communities

· maintain a focus on governance matters noting that operational staff will be identifying any operational issues

· ensure reasons are given to support the views and that these are based on relevant and not irrelevant considerations

· respond within two working days (staff will assume the local board does not have any feedback to give if there is no response received within this timeframe) and,

· provide updates to the local board on their nominated lead activities as appropriate.

Events

21. The Protocols require that a nominated local board lead be consulted, on behalf of the local board, on event applications that meet certain triggers. These triggers pertain to applications to hold events on Council-owned land in the local board area that require regulatory approval and involve one or more of the following matters:

· complete or substantial closure of the public open space

· more than 500 people

· road closure

· liquor

· ticketed event.

22. The role of the local board’s events lead is to be the point of consultation for staff processing event permits on local parks. The lead’s responsibility is to:

· receive information about event application on a local park, when the above triggers are met

· provide views, if any, on how the event activity may impact the local park and local communities

· maintain a focus on governance matters noting that staff who maintain the park and undertake operational duties will be identifying any operational issues e.g. need for traffic management etc

· ensure reasons are given to support the views and that these are based on relevant and not irrelevant considerations

· respond in a timely manner (staff recommend nominated leads strive to provide feedback within 5 days, if possible)

· provide updates to the local board on their nominated lead activities as appropriate.

23. The previous local board agreed to take part in a 12-month pilot of a fast-track approach to filming approval consultation. During the pilot period, local boards who are participating have agreed to waive the requirement for staff consultation for low and medium impact film shoot permit applications. Decisions on these applications will be made by staff and the local board nominated contact will be informed ahead of these activities taking place.

24. Staff are also required under the Protocols to notify the nominated local board member of areas relating to the event that may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk and decisions to approve events on Council-owned land in the local board area. The nominated lead will be the primary point of contact for these communications.

Liquor licence matters

25. The district licensing committees consider and grant or renew applications for liquor licences and manager’s certificates. When a business applies for a new liquor licence (on-licence, off-licence, club licence, or special licence) or a renewal, these applications are publicly notified.

26. The Governing Body has delegated to local boards the power to object to liquor licensing applications under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (GB/2014/103).

27. Local boards have 15 working days from the date of a public notice of liquor licence applications (new or renewals) to provide an objection on the matter. The district licensing committee is required to convene a public hearing whenever an objection has been filed unless the application is withdrawn, the objector does not require a public hearing, or it believes that the objection is vexatious and based on grounds outside the scope of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

28. As per the practice in previous terms, this report recommends delegating responsibility to an individual local board member to monitor public notices and lodge objections, if required, on time.

29. The nominated member’s authority extends to representing the local board at any public hearing that considers the local board’s objection. Where the nominated member is not available to attend a public hearing to speak to the local board’s objection, the alternate member or chairperson or other member agreed by the local board can represent the local board.

Input to resource consent matters

30. Decisions to grant resource consents are regulatory decisions of the council that sit with the Governing Body and are delegated to staff.

31. Governing Body has resolved that Local boards will be given the opportunity, within the statutory timeframes, to provide feedback, if any, on whether resource consent applications should be publicly notified (GB/2011/156).

32. Local Boards can also provide views on resource consent applications once they have been notified (and may speak to these views at hearings).

33. Resource consent processes are subject to statutory timeframes. To ensure the local board can participate effectively in this process, it is recommended that the local board appoint and authorise an individual member to take the lead in developing and providing feedback when applications are received.

34. Local boards, in previous terms, have identified a list of issues that automatically trigger their feedback on resource consent matters. When these issues or ‘triggers’ present themselves in a resource consent application, staff will email the nominated lead copies of applications for feedback. Local board leads are encouraged to provide comments on the matter within three working days.

35. Considerations by the lead, on behalf of the local board, should include how or if the proposed activity may adversely affect people in the local board area.

36. If the local board desires, the nominated lead for resource consent matters can also be the member in charge of assisting the local board in developing its feedback on other planning matters such as plan changes and notices of requirement. These matters cannot be delegated so feedback, if any, must be decided on by the full local board.

Auckland Zone/LGNZ

37. Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) is an incorporated society (New Zealand Local Government Association Inc) which represents the national interests of councils around New Zealand and leads best practice in the local government sector.

38. The objectives of LGNZ include promoting and advocating matters affecting the national interests of local government. LGNZ holds regular dialogue with government, parliamentarians and government agencies and provides thought leadership and research on matters of interest to local authorities.

39. LGNZ members are organized in geographically based zones and sectors generally. In 2019, LGNZ Rules were amended to remove Auckland from Zone 1 with an expectation that Auckland Council, with its 21 local boards, will operate as its own zone group (Auckland Zone).

40. In the previous term, Auckland Zone held quarterly meetings with the LGNZ President and Chief Executive. These meetings were co-chaired by the councillor and local board member who are appointed to the Local Government New Zealand National Council. Each local board appointed a representative to attend meetings of the Auckland Zone and take the lead on all matters relating thereto.

Delegation to chairperson – selection of shared representatives

41. From time to time during the term, local boards may be invited to appoint a limited number of representatives to working parties, advisory groups, and other groupings that the Governing Body may set up. The selection of a small number of people to represent many local boards requires local boards to work together.

42. In the previous term, Chairpersons played a critical role in reaching these joint decisions. Chairpersons can work as a selection committee (utilising their monthly Chairs’ Forum) to discuss and agree jointly on shared representatives for all local boards as and when required. In the previous term, this was also process authorised by local boards for the selection of the single local board representative to the Local Government New Zealand National Council and a representative to the Establishment Unit Board for the light rail project.

43. As representatives of their local boards, chairpersons can also work together in clusters to select representatives from different parts of the region, where this is required.

Manukau Harbour Forum

44. The Manukau Harbour Forum is a joint committee established by the nine local boards surrounding the Manukau Harbour. The joint committee structure of this forum enables these local boards to engage in collective and collaborative action to achieve improvements in water quality and the natural biodiversity of the Manukau Harbour and agreed joint actions that help improve the amenity value of the harbour.

45. As appointing bodies of the Manukau Harbour Forum, the nine local boards and the forum itself work collaboratively with mana whenua, the government, non-government organisations, businesses and communities that live on the harbour and its contributing waterways and estuaries.

46. Each local board appoints a member who represents the local board at meetings of the forum and takes the lead on all matters relating to the forum. Appointing an alternate can ensure the local board will be able to have a representative at meetings of the Manukau Harbour Forum should the appointed member not be available.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. This report recommends the appointment of nominated local board members to ensure that council can undertake its operational and statutory duties in a timely manner, while receiving local board input and decision-making in matters that are of local importance.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. This report seeks to appoint nominated local board members to perform specific functions.

49. Any local board member who is appointed as a nominated board member should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

50. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have a positive or negative impact for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

51. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

52. If local boards choose not to appoint a nominated board member for landowner approvals, film applications and events, staff will need to seek feedback from the chairperson. This could potentially lead to a busy workload for the local board chairperson, in addition to their existing duties.

53. If local boards choose not to delegate to provide views on notified applications, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views prior to submission closing dates and miss the opportunity to have their feedback presented and heard at a hearing.

54. If local boards choose not to delegate to provide their views on liquor licences, there is a risk that they will not be able to provide formal views prior to closings dates for submissions not coinciding with political meetings.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

55. Nominated local board members providing feedback will engage with staff acting in accordance with the Local Board Delegation Protocols.

56. Training for local board members will be offered on the Resource Management Act 1991 and the preparation of effective feedback for applications notified as part of a Resource Management Act 1991 process.

57. Nominated local board members (and alternates) who are delegated the responsibility of preparing and providing objections and speaking to the local board’s objection at district licensing committee hearings should sign-up to receive alcohol notices. This will ensure that they hear about new applications as soon as they are open for comment.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wendy Kjestrup - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 151, 153, 155, 157, 159, 161 Henderson Valley Road and 1-3 Border Road, Henderson

File No.: CP2022/15654

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 151-161 Henderson Valley Road and 1-3 Border Road, Henderson.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Border Road Developments Limited, agent Chris Turner of Civix Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

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

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 151-161Henderson Valley Road and 1-3 Border Road are:

· Whati Lane (applicant’s preference)

· Aka Lane (alternative)

· Kawe Lane (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Whati Lane’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Border Road Developments Limited at 151-161 Henderson Valley Road and 1-3 Border Road, Henderson, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60385710, SUB60396196 and RDN90103402).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN60385710 (subdivision ref; SUB60396196) was issued in June 2022 to create 54 residential lots and one commonly owned access lot (COAL).

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

8. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, COAL, or right of way, that serves more than five lots generally requires a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical, and efficient street numbering.

9. The new COAL therefore requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the COAL that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

11. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

12. Theme: The proposed names either reflect historical linkages to the area and site or particular features of the development/site i.e., particular landscape/environmental features characteristic of the area and site.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Whati Lane (applicant’s preference)	From te reo meaning ‘to pick fruit’, as well as to move from side to side. The reference to picking fruit refers to the long history of viticulture in the Henderson Valley and relates to the name of the development (Corban Park) and nearby Corban Reserve, both named after the Corban family who settled in Henderson and began wine making.
Aka Lane (alternative)	From te reo meaning ‘vine’. Linking to the viticultural history of the area. Evidence suggests that the development site was previously used for viticulture/horticulture.
Kawe Lane (alternative)	From te reo meaning ‘carry’ and relating to the “Kawe-rau” the carrying strap of Maki (Te Kawerau ancestor). Again, linking to horticulture/farming, as well as referring to the long history or Māori settlement and farming of the Henderson/Waitakere area.

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

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

15. Road Type: ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

21. On 5 September 2022, mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Kawerau Ā Maki

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority).

22. By the close of the consultation period the only response received was from Te Kawerau Ā Maki who were not in support of the original set of road names that had been sent for comment. Upon further correspondence with Te Kawerau Ā Maki the iwi suggested alternate names which the applicant accepted and are now proposed in this report.

23. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

25. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	151-161 Henderson Valley Road Site Plan	41
b ⇩	151-161 Henderson Valley Road Location Plan	43

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sharon Legge-Murray - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 77-79 Rangeview Road, Sunnyvale

File No.: CP2022/15602

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 77-79 Rangeview Road, Sunnyvale.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Rangeview Properties Limited, agent Ben Harper of Survey Worx Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 77-79 Rangeview Road are:

· Māra Way (applicant’s preference)

· Kāri Way (alternative)

· Oro Way (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Māra Way’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Rangeview Properties Limited at 77-79 Rangeview Road, Sunnyvale, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN30577536, SUB60039160-A and RDN90101255).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN30577536 (subdivision ref; number SUB60039160) was issued in March 2017 to create 25 freehold residential lots and one commonly owned access lot. The consent also approved the upgrade of the existing driveway from Rangeview Road into a public road to be vested with Auckland Council.

7. Resource consent reference BUN30577536 (subdivision ref; SUB60039160-A) was issued in July 2018 to vary the approved resource consent (subdivision ref; SUB60039160) by changing the approved road extension off Rangeview Road from a public road to be vested with Council as a COAL forming part of the remaining COAL.

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

9. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, COAL, and right of way, that serves more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical, and efficient street numbering.

10. The new COAL therefore requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the COAL that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

12. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

13. Theme: The proposed names reflect a historical link to the landscape/environmental features of the area.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Māra Way (applicant’s preference)	Means ‘Garden’ in Te Reo Māori – Sunnyvale was historically an area of Orchards, gardens, and vineyards.
Kāri Way (alternative)	Means ‘Garden, Vineyard’ in Te Reo Māori – Sunnyvale was historically an area of Orchards, gardens, and vineyards.
Oro Way (alternative)	Means ‘Orchard’ in Te Reo Māori – Sunnyvale was historically an area of Orchards, gardens, and vineyards.

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

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

16. Road Type: ‘Way’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

22. On 16 August 2022, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, and asked to comment on a suite of names proposed by the applicant.

23. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

24. By the close of the consultation period, no responses, comments or feedback were received.

25. On 8 September 2022, the applicant’s agent contacted Te Kawerau ā Maki directly, as the development is within an area of particular cultural interest to this iwi group, again seeking feedback on the names provided.

26. On 9 September 2022, a representative of Te Kawerau ā Maki responded saying they were not in support of the original names provided and suggested Te Reo names which the applicant accepted and which are now proposed in this report.

27. The site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

28. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

29. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	77-79 Rangeview Road Site Plan	49
b ⇩	77-79 Rangeview Road Location Map	51

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new public road name at 36-46 and 56 Moire Road, Massey

File No.: CP2022/15848

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new public road, created by way of a subdivision development at 36-46 and 56 Moire Road, Massey

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of Kāinga Ora, their Senior Stakeholder Relationship Manager Catherine Gilhooly, has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the new road at 36-46 and 56 Moire Road are:

· Pūtere Crescent (applicant’s preference)

· Pōuto Crescent (alternative)

· Mānu Crescent (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approves the name ‘Pūtere Crescent’ for the new road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Kainga Ora – Homes and Communities at 36-46 and 56 Moire Road, Massey, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references LUC60019950-C, SUB60039598-C and RDN90104262).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference LUC60019950-C (subdivision ref; SUB60039598-C) was issued in March 2022 to create seven super lots and one new road.

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

9. The new road therefore requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the road that requires a name is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

12. Theme: The area for Massey is known as Mānutewhau referring to the floating (mānu) seeds from the whau tree. The proposed names represent the floating action of these seeds.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Pūtere Crescent (applicant’s preference)	Means ‘to go in a body, float as a group’ in Te Reo Māori.
Pōuto Crescent (alternative)	Means ‘to float (as in a fishing net)’ in Te Reo Māori.
Mānu Crescent (alternative)	Means ‘to float’ in Te Reo Māori.

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

15. Road Type: ‘Crescent’ is an acceptable road type for the new road, suiting the form and layout of the road.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. On 15 August 2022 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines, and invited to provide road name options. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

22. By the close of the consultation period the only response received was from Te Kawarau ā Maki. Other iwi did either not respond or deferred to Te Kawerau ā Maki. Te Kawerau ā Maki suggested Te Reo names which the applicant accepted, and which are now proposed in this report.

23. Kāinga Ora supports the use of Te Reo Maori in developing street names, while acknowledging and celebrating the heritage of the area. The names suggested by Te Kawerau iwi recognise the environment and the stories and lives of Te Kawerau ā Maki tupuna/ancestors in this rohe.

24. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

26. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

27. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	36-46 and 56 Moire Road Massey Site Plan	57
b ⇩	36-46 and 56 Moire Road Massey Location Plan	59

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sharon Legge-Murray - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 162-176 Triangle Road, Massey

File No.: CP2022/15897

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road being a commonly owned access lot (COAL) created by way of the subdivision at 162-176 Triangle Road, Massey.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Fresco Enterprises Limited, agent Nigel Barnes of Trig Consultants Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 162-176 Triangle Road are:

· Sher Rise (applicant’s preference)

· Arawhiti Rise (alternative)

· Waiora Rise (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Sher Rise’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Fresco Enterprises Limited at 162-176 Triangle Road, Massey, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN30580564, SUB60039106 and RDN90104426).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN30580564 (subdivision ref; SUB60039106) was issued in January 2017 to create 9 residential lots, a Local Purpose (Drainage) Reserve and 3 Lots forming a commonly owned access (COAL).

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

8. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, COAL or right of way, that serves more than five lots generally requires a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical, and efficient street numbering.

9. The new private road therefore requires a road name as it serves more than five lots. This can be seen in Attachment A, where the road that requires a name is highlighted in purple.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Sher Rise (applicant’s preference)	Of Indian origin, meaning Lion. The site previously undeveloped for 40 plus years and had become overgrown like a jungle. ‘Sher’ can be related to the site as king of the jungle.
Arawhiti Rise (alternative)	Meaning in Te Reo Māori ‘the crossing’, ‘Ara’ - ‘the path’ and ‘whiti’ - ‘to cross’. This is in reference to the new private road having a new bridge installed to cross the stream.
Waiora Rise (alternative)	Meaning in Te Reo Māori ‘water of the sustenance of life’, ‘Wai’ the water, ‘ora’, the health. To acknowledge and pay respect to the stream that passes through the site.

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

15. Road Type: ‘Rise, is an acceptable road type for the new public road, suiting the form and layout of the road.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. On 8 September 2022 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua.

22. By the close of the consultation period, Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board commented they would support korero from the iwi of the rohe but no other replies were received from iwi. Dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

23. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

25. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	162-176 Triangle Road Site Plan	65
b ⇩	162-176 Triangle Road Location Map	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 215 Triangle Road, Massey

File No.: CP2022/15971

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 215 Triangle Road, Massey.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Narrowneck Limited, Max Grigg of CPMC Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 215 Triangle Road are:

· Albion Heights Rise (applicant’s preference)

· Monica Place (alternative)

· Awhi Lane (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Albion Heights Rise’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by Narrowneck Limited, at 215 Triangle Road, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60328577, SUB60328640 and RDN90102948).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN60328577 (subdivision reference number SUB60328640) was issued in March 2022 for the creation of 58 freehold allotments and four commonly owned access lots (COALs).

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

9. LINZ has advised that only the COAL highlighted in Attachment B needs to be named. The lots being served off the other COALs can be sub-addressed off the existing road and therefore those COALs do not need a name.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

12. Theme: The proposed road names either links back to the name of the residential development or the developer’s good wish for the future owners and occupiers of these allotments.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Albion Heights Rise (applicant’s preference)	Name has personal meaning to the owner and the informal name for the development is Albion Heights, so would be great to have cohesion between the road name and development name.
Monica Place (alternative)	Named after the developer’s pet.
Awhi Lane (alternative)	Name chosen by the owner, meaning to embrace and cherish the land we have.

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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. On 30 September 2022 mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Paoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Paoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngati Tamaterā.

22. By the close of the consultation period, no responses were received. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

23. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

25. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	215 Triangle Road Location Map	73
b ⇩	215 Triangle Road Site Plan	75

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 33 and 35 Matipo Road, 3,9 and 35 Renata Crescent, Te Atatu Peninsula

File No.: CP2022/15828

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL), created by way of a subdivision development at 33 and 35 Matipo Road and 3, 9 and 35 Renata Crescent, Te Atatu Peninsula.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

2. On behalf of the developer and applicant, Michelle Liu, agent Liucia Perich of Civix Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

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

4. The proposed names for the new private road at 33 and 35 Matipo Road and 3,9 and 35 Renata Crescent Te Atatu Peninsula. are:

· Paetai Lane (applicant’s preference)

· Ika Lane (alternative)

· Kaihao Lane (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Paetai Lane’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 33 and 35 Matipo Road and 3,9 and 35 Renata Crescent, Te Atatu Peninsula, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60382186 and SUB60382240).

Horopaki

Context

5. Resource consent reference BUN60382186 (subdivision reference number SUB60382240) was issued in June 2022 for the construction of 59 new residential freehold units and two commonly owned access lots (COALs).

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

7. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, COAL or right of way, that serves more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

8. Therefore, in this development, only one of the new COALs requires a road name because it serves more than five lots. The other COAL does not need to be named as per consultation with Land Information New Zealand, the allotments it serves can be addressed off existing Renata Road. The COAL to be named can be seen in Attachment A where it is highlighted in yellow.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. The Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The Guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval

10. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

11. Theme: Te Atatu Peninsula is a costal environment surrounded by Mangroves. For this reason, the applicant has chosen names to compliment the local environment , as detailed in the table below:

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Paetai Place (applicant’s preference)	Māori word for mangroves. Links to the mangroves surrounding Te Atatū, and a connection to the estuarine environment.
Ika Lane (alternative)	Māori word for fish. Links to the coastal environment surrounding Te Atatū.
Kaihao Place (alternative)	Māori word for fisherman. Links to the coastal environment surrounding Te Atatū.

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

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

14. Road Type: ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new private road, suiting the form and layout of the COAL.

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

20. On 14 September 2022, mana whenua were contacted by the applicant as set out in the Guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngāti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

· Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

21. By the close of the consultation period, no responses had been received. Dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

22. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

24. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

25. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	33 and 35 Matipo Road, 3,9 and 35 Renata Crescent, Te Atatu Peninsula Location Plan	81
b ⇩	33 and 35 Matipo Road, 3,9 and 35 Renata Crescent, Te Atatu Peninsula Site Plan	83

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sharon Legge-Murray - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Approval for a new private road name at 148-162 McLeod Road, Te Atatu South

File No.: CP2022/16451

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Henderson-Massey Local Board to name a new private road, being a commonly owned access lot (COAL) created by way of a subdivision development at 148-162 McLeod Road, Te Atatu South.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, McLeod Green Limited, agent Jaskirat Singh of Maven Associates Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the new private road at 148-162 McLeod Road Te Atatu South are:

· Rauemi Way (applicant’s preference)

· Wahawaha Way (alternative)

· Mazeppa Way (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) approve the name ‘Rauemi Way’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision at 148-162 McLeod Road Te Atatu South, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60371470, SUB60371472 and RDN90104627).

Horopaki

Context

6. A resource consent, council reference BUN60371470 was issued in September 2021 for the construction of 156 residential dwellings and a commonly owned access lot (COAL).

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

9. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, COAL, or right of way, that serves more than five lots generally requires a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical, and efficient street numbering.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The Guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

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

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

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

12. Theme: The proposed names either reflect historical linkages to the area and site or particular features of the development/site i.e. landscape/environmental features characteristic of the area and site.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Rauemi Way (applicant’s preference)	Means ‘resources’ in Te Reo Māori. Te Atatu South is historically known as a place with an abundance of resources for weaving, food and water.
Wahawaha Way (alternative)	Means ‘estuary’ in Te Reo Māori. This describes the suburb of Te Atatu South geographically and this has remained the same in the past and present. At the end of McLeod Road, along the small outlet of the Whau, is where the people of Te Kawerau ā Maki once camped and caught trevally (araara).
Mazeppa Way (alternative)	The name of one of the ships that were part of New Zealand’s first commercial sailing ship fleet. The Circular Saw Line which was formed by a partnership between Thomas Henderson and the MacFarlane family. This is a historic link to the area of Te Atatu South, as the Circular Saw Line operated from this area.

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

15. Road Type: ‘Way’ is an acceptable road type for the new road, suiting the form and layout of the road.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. On 21 July 2022 mana whenua were contacted by the applicant, as set out in the Guidelines, and invited to provide feedback on the proposed road name options. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Nāgti Tamaterā (Ngāti Tamaterā Settlement Trust)

· Ngāti Te Ata (Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua)

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Te Ākitai Waiohua (Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

22. By the close of the consultation period the only response received was from Te Kawerau ā Maki. Te Kawerau ā Maki supported the proposed names set out in this report. To date no other responses have been received.

23. The level of feedback received from mana whenua is often dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

25. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	148-162 McLeod Road Site Plan	89
b ⇩	148-162 McLeod Road Location Map	91

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Dale Rewa - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Local board feedback for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions

File No.: CP2022/16009

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To recommend that the Henderson-Massey Local Board delegate authority to the local board Chair to submit the local board’s formal views for inclusion in Auckland Council submissions to Central Government and other councils, where this feedback is due before a local board meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Central Government (and other councils) seek feedback through public consultation on bills, inquiries and other key matters. The consultation timeframes vary between four and eight weeks.

3. The Governing Body is responsible for making official submissions to Central Government on most matters except for submissions to government on legislation where it specifically relates to a local board area. Where the Governing Body decides to make an official submission on a Central Government matter, staff work to develop a draft submission for consideration by the Governing Body and will call for local board input so it can be incorporated. The Auckland Council submission needs to be approved within the consultation timeframes set by Central Government.

4. Local board input is required to be approved by the local board. Where local boards are unable to make these decisions at a local board meeting due to the constrained timeframes, another mechanism is required. In situations where local boards prefer not to use the urgent decision process, local boards sometimes provide informal feedback that is endorsed at the next business meeting. This is not considered best practice because the local board input can be challenged or changed at ratification or approval stage, which leads to reputational risk for the council.

5. In situations where timeframes do not allow reporting to formal business meetings, staff recommend that the local board either uses the urgent decision process or delegates authority to the Chair to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions. Both options provide an efficient way to ensure that local board formal input is provided when external parties set submission deadlines that do not allow formal input to be obtained from a local board business meeting.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

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

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

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

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

Horopaki

Context

6. Government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils seek feedback on issues using both formal and informal consultation opportunities. Auckland Council has an ongoing opportunity to provide advocacy on public policy matters and this is often done by making a public submission. Submissions can be provided on other council’s plans, on policy and legislative reviews or on an agency’s proposed strategy.

7. Council submissions are the formal responses to the public consultation opportunities that are open to everyone, including all Aucklanders.

8. Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 the Governing Body must consider any views and preferences expressed by a local board, where a Governing Body decision affects or may affect the responsibilities or operation of the local board or the well-being of communities within its local board area.

9. Under the current allocation of decision-making responsibility, the Governing Body is allocated decision-making responsibility for “submissions to government on legislation including official submissions of Auckland Council incorporating local board views”. Local boards are allocated decision-making for “submissions to government on legislation where it specifically relates to that local board area only”.

10. Central Government agencies set the deadlines for submissions which are generally between four to eight weeks. These timeframes do not usually allow for formal reporting to local boards to input into the council submission. In situations where local boards prefer not to use the urgent decision process, local boards can sometimes provide informal feedback that is endorsed at the next business meeting. This is not considered best practice because the local board input can be challenged or changed at ratification or approval stage, which leads to reputational risk for council.

11. Providing a delegation for Central Government submissions provides local boards with another option to give formal local views within prescribed timeframes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. There are five options available to local boards to approve their formal views and input on submissions to Central Government. Where this input is sought within a time constrained process and is due before a meeting of the local board, only four of these options will be available.

Table 1: Options for mechanisms through which the local boards can approve their formal views on Auckland Council submissions to Central Government and other councils

Options	Pros	Cons
1. Local board input approved at a business meeting	· Decision is made and adopted in a public meeting (transparency of decision making) · All local board members have the opportunity to make the formal decision	· Local board meeting schedules and agenda deadlines often do not align with external agency deadlines
2. Local board input approved at an extraordinary meeting of the local board	· Provides a mechanism for local boards to provide their formal views where submission deadlines do not align with local board meeting schedules · Decision is made and adopted in a public meeting (transparency of decision making) · All local board members have the opportunity to make the formal decision	· Extraordinary meeting needs to be called by a resolution (requires anticipation by the local board) or requisition in writing delivered to the Chief Executive. The process usually requires a minimum of three clear working days · There are additional costs incurred to run an unscheduled meeting · It may be difficult to schedule a time when enough local board members can attend to achieve a quorum
3. Local board input approved using urgent decision mechanism	· It provides a mechanism for local boards to provide their formal views where submission deadlines do not align with local board meeting schedules · Local board input can be submitted once the Chair, Deputy Chair and Local Area Manager have received the report providing the local board views and input · The urgent decision needs the sign-off from two local board members (i.e. the Chair and the Deputy Chair), rather than just one.	· The decision is not made in a public meeting. It may be perceived as non-transparent decision-making because it is not made by the full local board · Chair and Deputy Chair may not have time to properly consult and ascertain view of the full local board
4. Local board input approved by the Chair who has been delegated authority from the local board (staff recommend this option)	· It provides a mechanism for local boards to provide their formal views where submission deadlines do not align with local board meeting schedules and local boards do not want to use the urgent decision process · Local board input can be submitted as soon as possible after the local board views and input have been collated and discussed by the local board members	· Decision is not made in a public meeting. It may be perceived as non-transparent decision-making because it is not made by the full local board · The Chair who has the delegated authority may not have time to properly consult and ascertain views of the full local board
5. Local board input submitted and ratified at a later date	· Local board informal input can be submitted as soon as possible after the local board views and input have been collated and discussed by the local board members	· Local board input submitted is considered to be the informal views of the local board until they are approved · Local board input can be challenged or changed at ratification or approval stage · Decision to ratify informal views, even if made in a public meeting, is unable to be changed in the council submission (can be perceived as non-transparent decision-making) · Inclusion of informal views in the Auckland Council submission will be at the discretion of the Governing Body. These may be included with caveats noting the views have not been ratified by the local board · There is reputational risk if the local board changes its views.

13. Options one, two and three are already available to local boards and can be utilised as required and appropriate. Option one should always be used where timeframes allow reporting. Option four requires a delegation in order for a local board to utilise this mechanism and should be used only when timeframes do not allow reporting to a business meeting.

14. Local boards who wish to utilise option four are requested to delegate to the Chair as this fits within the leadership role of the Chair and they are more likely to be available because the Chair is a full-time role. The role of this delegated member will be to attest that the approved and submitted input constitutes the views of the local board. The input should then be published with the agenda of the next formal business meeting of the local board to provide transparency. The delegate may choose not to exercise their delegation if the matter is of a sensitive nature and is something that the full board should consider at a business meeting.

15. Each local board will oversee its own process for considering and developing their local board input that will be approved by the delegated member. This can include discussions at workshops, developing ideas in a small working group or allocating it to an individual member to draft.

16. Option five is not considered best practice and local boards are strongly discouraged from using this.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

18. This report proposes a delegation to ensure that staff can undertake the preparation of submissions in a timely manner, while receiving formal local board input on matters that are of local board importance.

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

Local impacts and local board views

19. This report seeks to establish a specific delegation for the local board Chair.

20. Any local board member who is delegated responsibilities should ensure that they represent the wider local board views and preferences on each matter before them.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have a positive or negative impact for Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22. A decision of this procedural nature is not considered to have financial implications on Auckland Council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. If local boards choose to delegate to provide their formal views on Auckland Council submissions, there is a risk that this mechanism is perceived as non-transparent decision-making because it is not made by the full local board. This can be mitigated by publishing the submitted local board input on the next agenda.

24. There is also a risk that the Chair who has the delegated authority may not have time to properly consult and ascertain views of the full local board. This can be mitigated by encouraging the local board to collectively discuss and agree their input before it is submitted by the member who has been delegated authority.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

25. On those occasions where it is required, the delegation will be used to approve and submit the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Wendy Kjestrup - Senior Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Henderson-Massey Local Board

06 December 2022

Local Board feedback on Auckland Unitary Plan changes 78-83

File No.: CP2022/16317

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback from the local board on Auckland Council’s notified plan changes and variations that implement:

· the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD)

· amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) requiring medium density residential standards (MDRS) be incorporated

· additions and amendments to the Historic Heritage and Notable Tree Schedules.

2. To provide an overview of submissions received from 18 August to 29 September 2022 on the council’s plan changes and variations.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Decision-makers on the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) must consider local boards’ views on plan changes and variations if local boards choose to provide their views. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its feedback on the plan changes and variations that seek to implement the NPS-UD and RMA requirements.

4. The council’s response to the NPS-UD and RMA amendments are set out in plan changes 78-83 (PC 78–83) and in variations 4 and 5:

· PC 78 is the council’s intensification plan change, and is the main one that implements the NPS-UD and the RMA amendments

· PC 79 amends the AUP transport provisions to manage effects of intensification on the transport network. It includes provisions for pedestrian safety, lighting and electric vehicle re-charging stations for multi-unit development

· PC 80 amends the AUP’s Regional Policy Statement to align it with the NPS-UD

· PC 81 adds buildings to the AUP’s historic heritage schedule (Schedule 14)

· PC 82 amends details in the AUP historic heritage schedule (Schedule14), mainly by enlarging or reducing the size of historic places already scheduled

· PC 83 adds new notable trees and corrects errors in the AUP schedule of notable trees (Schedule 10)

· variation 4 relates to rezoning of some areas of open space already proposed to be re-zoned to residential land

· variation 5 relates to a site-specific rezoning (at Schnapper Rock Road in Greenhithe).

5. Some amendments to the AUP are mandatory. The council must change the AUP to implement the NPS-UD and amendments to the RMA. The NPS-UD also allows the council to make decisions on some other matters to help shape Auckland’s well-functioning urban environment. These include:

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

ii) the building heights and density of urban form to enable residential development within and next to neighbourhood centres, local centres, and town centres

iii) The “qualifying matters” that will apply in some areas of Auckland that may allow the council to modify (or limit) the required building heights and density to the extent necessary to accommodate the qualifying matters.

6. Central government has identified potential qualifying matters in NPS-UD and RMA amendments. The council has included other ‘qualifying matters’ in PC 78 that are important for Auckland.

7. The plan changes and variations were open for submission over a six-week period, concluding on 29 September 2022. Submissions have now been coded and summarised, and further submissions may be lodged from 24 November to 8 December 2022. Further submissions can be made in support or opposition to an original submission but cannot introduce new matters.

8. Preliminary analysis of submissions identified these themes:

a) support and opposition to the zoning changes proposed

b) support or opposition for the extent of walkable catchments and related height/intensification

c) opposition to how qualifying matters have been applied, including opposition from large-scale developers to the application of the new Residential Low-Density zone as the way that some qualifying matters are implemented

d) support and opposition to special character as a qualifying matter

e) support for water and wastewater infrastructure as a qualifying matter in some locations e.g. Whangaparāoa, and opposition to this qualifying matter where landowners seek rezoning that increases the density of development on their site(s)

f) requests to rezone and apply MDRS to land in the light rail corridor which is excluded from PC 78.

9. Local boards are now invited to provide feedback on the council’s plan changes and variations which will be provided to the independent hearings panel for its consideration. These views must be the subject of a local board resolution.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Henderson-Massey Local Board:

a) provide feedback on PC 78, PC 79, PC 80, PC 81, PC 82, and PC 83

b) provide feedback on variations 4 and 5

c) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing in 2023

d) delegate authority to the chairperson of the local board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution c) is unable to attend the hearing.

Horopaki

Context

Policy development

10. The NPS-UD and RMA amendments require that a proposed intensification plan change be notified by 20 August 2022. The Planning Committee and local board chairs (or their delegates) attended workshops and meetings throughout 2021 and 2022. Since October 2021, local boards and mana whenua have contributed to the development of the PCs 78-83, resulting in the approval of six plan changes and two variations to the AUP.

Decision-making authority

11. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area about the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. If the local board chooses to provide its views, those views will be provided in writing to the independent hearings panel.

12. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents (as required by sections 15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009). PCs 78-83 and variations 4 and 5 will be included in the AUP, if approved.

13. An amendment to the RMA created a different hearings process for PC 78 and variations 4 and 5. The independent hearing panel makes recommendations to council about these. For PCs 79-83, the hearings panel is delegated responsibility to make the decisions on these, without reference back to council.

14. Local board members may then present the local board’s views at the hearing of the plan changes by the independent hearings panel. Local board views will be considered when the council makes decisions on the recommendations for PC 78 and Variations 4 and 5.

15. This report provides an overview of the plan changes and variations, and a preliminary summary of submissions’ key themes. Local board views must be the subject of a local board resolution(s) if those views are provided to the panel.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Local board feedback on PCs 78-83 and variations 4 and 5 is now sought through resolutions at this meeting. This feedback will be forwarded to the independent hearings panel for its consideration.

17. Plan change provisions over which council has some discretion include the following key matters in PC78:

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

ii) the approach to, and extent of, intensification of areas within and adjacent to town, local and neighbourhood centres (as required under NPS-UD Policy 3(d))

iii) the selection of, and approach to, “any other qualifying matters” that limit the height and density that would otherwise be required by the NPS-UD Policy 3 and/or the medium density residential standards that must be applied to Auckland’s relevant residential zones.

18. Submissions were received on plan change matters that are mandatory in the NPS-UD and RMA amendments. Mandatory matters include the introduction of walkable catchments, the enablement of six storey buildings in all zones in walkable catchments, and the incorporation of MDRS in all “relevant residential zones” (Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings zone, Mixed Housing Urban and Low-Density zone) outside walkable catchments. As these matters are mandatory, the independent hearings panel will be unable to recommend changes in response to these submissions.

19. All submissions have been numbered, organised and allocated to topics in the summary of decisions requested to enable evaluation and assessment by staff and the public. This information is available to local boards via the Auckland Unitary Plan webpage when it is publicly notified from 5 December 2022. It will also be provided to the independent hearings panel to assist the panel with understanding the public’s view of the council’s plan changes and variations, and with formulating arrangements for hearings in 2023. Table 1 provides the numbers of submissions received.

Table 1 Submissions received on PC 78 and related changes

Plan change number	Plan change name	Number of submissions received	Spatial application of the plan change
78	Intensification	2398	All Auckland except Hauraki Gulf Islands
79	Amendments to the Transport Provisions	128	All Auckland except Hauraki Gulf Islands
80	Regional Policy Statement Well-Functioning Urban Environment, Resilience to the Effects of Climate Change and Qualifying Matters	88	All Auckland
81	Additions to Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule	53	Various locations, see Attachment A
82	Amendments to Schedule 14 Historic Heritage Schedule	33	Various locations, see Attachment A
83	Additions and amendments to Schedule 10 Notable Trees Schedule	25	Various locations, see Attachment A
Variation 4 to PC60	Open Space and Other Rezoning Matters	12	Various locations, see Attachment A
Variation 5 to PC66 (Private)	57 and 57a Schnapper Rock Road	5	Greenhithe, see Attachment A Upper Harbour Local Board

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

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

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

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

23. All relevant council departments and some Council Controlled Organisations contributed to preparing the council’s plan changes to implement the NPS-UD and the RMA amendments. Auckland Transport and Watercare will have an ongoing role during the hearings, contributing to the council’s evidence presented to the independent hearings panel. Eke Panuku is a submitter, and so is not part of the council team that will prepare and present evidence to the independent hearings panel.

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

Local impacts and local board views

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

25. Although not local board views, as these require a business meeting resolution, the following local boards provided local board input to Planning Committee regarding the government’s intensification directives:

· Ōrākei Local Board presented on the Resource Management (Enabling Housing and Others Matter) Bill on 4 November 2021, and on the National Policy Statement on Urban Development on 31 March 2022

· Albert-Eden, Devonport-Takapuna, Henderson-Massey, Kaipātiki, Mangere-Ōtāhuhu, Ōrākei, Puketāpapa, Waitematā, and Whau Local Boards all presented to the Planning Committee on NPS UD on 30 June 2022

· Manurewa Local Board presented regarding provision and protection of green space where intensification is planned on 4 August 2022, the meeting where the plan changes were approved for notification.

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

· interests and preferences of people in the local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

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

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

Context

27. Auckland Council has obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and council’s Significance and Engagement Policy to take special consideration when engaging with Māori and to enable Māori participation in council decision-making to promote Māori well-being. The Schedule of Issues of Significance is a statutory document that guides the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s advocacy to Auckland Council, Local Boards and Council-Controlled Organisations, for and on behalf of Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau.

28. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan changes 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). More than 180,000 Aucklanders identify as Māori, as at the time of the 2018 census.

Potential impact of plan changes and variations for Māori

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

30. None of the plan changes or variations trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance or Māori Plan (2017, Independent Māori Statutory Board).

Māori involvement and feedback

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

35. Common themes shared in hui include:

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

b) access to open space for health and wellbeing

c) safe and connected whānau and communities

d) avoiding development in areas poorly served by infrastructure

e) access to affordable housing options

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

m) avoiding exacerbating natural hazard risks

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

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. NPS-UD implementation has been progressing within existing budgets. However, the RMA amendments resulted in a significant increase in the scale and complexity of the project, without any changes to the NPS-UD implementation timeframes. This requires a greater than anticipated level of change to the AUP, for example there are changes proposed to more than 60 AUP chapters.

37. The financial impact of these changes will affect the current 2022-2023 financial year, and potentially the following year. While it is expected that additional costs in the current financial year can be met through a re-prioritisation of work programmes within the Chief Planning Office, further costs (primarily relating to operation of an independent hearings panel and engagement of specialists) may require re-prioritisation of other work programmes from across the council. Any impacts will be of a scale that will not affect the council’s overall financial position, nor affect any boards’ assets or operations.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

· the mechanism for the local board to express its views and preferences

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

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

40. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a private plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s) (see 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

Local board views

41. Resolutions of the local board will be provided to the independent hearings panel in the first quarter of 2023. The local board member delegated the authority to speak to local board views will be invited to the relevant hearings. Local board resolutions will also be reported to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee for its decision-making on the recommendations it receives from the independent hearings panel.

Process for plan changes and variations

42. Staff continue to analyse the submissions received, and this analysis will be presented in evidence to the independent hearings panel during the hearing of submissions in 2023. A report to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee will request a sub-group be established as decision-maker for policy shifts that may arise during the hearings (as decisions may be required more quickly than can be achieved by reporting to meetings in compliance with the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act).

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Local board areas in which changes are proposed for historic heritage or notable trees and variations	107

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Eryn Shields - Team Leader Regional, North West and Islands

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Adam Milina - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Chris Carter
Deputy Chairperson	Brooke Loader
Members	Brenda Brady
	Peter Chan, JP
	Dan Collins
	Dr Will Flavell
	Oscar Kightley
	Ingrid Papau

Author	Brenda Railey - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Adam Milina - Local Area Manager