Agenda of Rodney Local Board - Wednesday, 15 February 2023

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 Rodney Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting held on Wednesday, 8 February 2023 as a true and correct record.

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 Rodney 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: Omaha Shorebirds Protection Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Omaha Shorebirds Protection Trust have requested a deputation to provide an update on activities.

2. A presentation and additional information have been provided and are available under Attachments A and B, respectively, of this item (under separate cover).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank the Omaha Shorebirds Protection Trust for their presentation and attendance.

8.2 Deputation: Restore Rodney East

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Restore Rodney East have requested a deputation to provide an update on progress and outlook for 2023.

2. A presentation has been provided and is available under Attachment A of this item (under separate cover).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Restore Rodney East for their presentation and attendance.

8.3 Deputation: Forest and Bird Warkworth

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Forest and Bird Warkworth have requested a deputation to provide an update on activities.

2. A presentation has been provided and is available under Attachment A of this item (under separate cover).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Forest and Bird Warkworth for their presentation and attendance.

8.4 Deputation: Matakana Coast Trail Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The Matakana Coast Trail Trust have requested a deputation to provide an update on progress.

2. A presentation has been provided and is available under Attachment A of this item (under separate cover).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank the Matakana Coast Trail Trust for their presentation and 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 three minutes per person is allowed, following which there may be questions from members.

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

10 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.”

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

One new private road at 951 Coatesville Riverhead Highway, Riverhead

File No.: CP2023/00181

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the name for one new private road being a commonly owner access lot created by way of subdivision at 951 Coatesville Riverhead Highway, Riverhead undertaken by Cabra Developments.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines, set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names.

3. These guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development the applicant shall be given the opportunity of suggesting their preferred new road names for the local board’s approval.

4. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

5. Cabra Developments has proposed the following names for consideration by the local board:

· Ada Lane (applicant’s preference)

· River Downs Lane (alternative)

· Greenfield Lane (alternative)

6. 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).

7. 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.

8. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the guidelines.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve the name ‘Ada Lane’ for the new private road in the subdivision being undertaken by Cabra Developments at 951 Coatesville Riverhead Highway, Riverhead in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (Resource Consent references BUN60382053, SUB60382055 and road naming reference RDN90103642) and referenced in Attachments A and B to the agenda report.

Horopaki

Context

9. The multi-lot subdivision, (Council Ref SUB60382055), was approved on 15 February 2022.

10. Site and location plans of the subdivision can be found in Attachments A and B.

11. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, commonly owned access lot, 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

12. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names.

13. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland region.

14. These 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.

15. 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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

16. Theme: The applicant has chosen names that they consider appropriate for the locality. In this regard the names and their relevance are detailed in the table below:

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Ada Lane (applicant’s preference)	After the former owner’s grandmother’s name, Ada Joyce.
River Downs Lane (alternative)	River Downs is the name of the subdivision development.
Greenfield Lane (alternative)	Relates to the green fields surrounding the area.

17. Assessment: The proposed name options have been assessed by Auckland 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.

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

19. Road type: The road type ‘Lane’ is an acceptable road type for the new road.

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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.

25. 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.

26. On 2 December 2022 mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant through the Resource Consent Unit’s central facilitation process as set out in the guidelines.

27. Representatives of the following groups with a general interest in the 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 Maru

· Ngāti Whanaunga

· Ngāti Manuhiri

· Ngāti Wai

· Ngāti Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Ngati Pāoa Trust Board

· Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust.

28. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days) no responses had been received.

29. Dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for council.

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database which includes street addresses issued by councils.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	951 Coatesville RH HW Scheme Plan	13
b ⇩	951 Coatesville RH HW Locality Plan	15

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove - Subdivision Advisor, Orewa

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

Two new private road names at 231 Amreins Road, Taupaki.

File No.: CP2023/00234

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the name for two new private roads being commonly owned access lots created by way of a subdivision undertaken by LYY Development Ltd at 231 Amreins Road, Taupaki.

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, LYY Development Limited, agent Nikki Osterman of Cato Bolam 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 two new private roads at 231 Amreins Road are:

Private Road 1

· Pakanui Lane (applicant’s preference)

· Kukuwai Lane (alternative)

· Rakau Lane (alternative).

Private Road 2

· Piwari Lane (applicant’s preference)

· Ngaruru Lane (alternative)

· Manawa Lane (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve the following names for the two new private roads created by way of subdivision at 231 Amreins Road, Taupaki, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (Resource consent references BUN60392680 and SUB60392683 and road naming reference RDN90105863 and referenced in Attachments A and B to the agenda report.

· Pakanui Lane (Private Road 1)

· Piwari Lane (Private Road 2).

Horopaki

Context

6. The multi-lot subdivision (Council Ref. BUN60392680) was approved on 21 July 2022.

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, commonly owned access lot, 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. Therefore, the two new private roads require road names because they each serve more than five lots.

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

12. Theme: The applicant has chosen names that they consider appropriate for the locality. In this regard the names and their relevance are detailed in the table below.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Pakanui Lane (Private Road 1 Applicant preferred)	Māori name of nearby stream
Kukuwai Lane (Alternative 1)	Māori for ‘wetland’
Rakau Lane (Alternative 2)	Māori for ‘trees’
Piwari Lane (Private Road 2 Applicant preferred)	Māori for ‘beautiful’
Ngaruru Lane (Alternative 1)	Māori for ‘thrive /flourish’
Manawa Lane (Alternative 2)	Māori for ‘heart’

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 roads, suiting the form and layout of the private roads.

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 29 November 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 Maru

· Ngāti Manuhiri

· Ngāti Wai.

22. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days), no responses had been received.

23. Dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

26. LYY Development Limited 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 Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. Land Information New Zealand provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Amreins Road Scheme Plan	21
b ⇩	Amreins Road Locality Plan	23

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove - Subdivision Advisor, Orewa

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

One new private road name at 21 Sidwell Road, Milldale

File No.: CP2023/00245

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the name for one new private road being a commonly owned access lot created by way of a subdivision undertaken by WFH Properties by at 21 Sidwell Road, Milldale.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, WFH Properties Limited, agent Warren Frogley has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. The proposed private 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 one new private road at 21 Sidwell Road are:

· Fredrica Crescent (applicant’s preference)

· Robina Crescent (alternative)

· Fanny Crescent (alternative).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve the name ‘Fredrica Crescent’ for the new private road created by way of subdivision undertaken by WFH Properties Limited at 21Sidwell Road, Milldale, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60385134, SUB60385136 and road naming reference RDN90105032).

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference BUN60385134 was issued on 20 June 2022 for the creation of 25 new lots including one new private way.

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

8. In accordance with the Standards, every public road and any private way, commonly owned access lot, 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. Therefore, in this development, the new private way requires a road name as it will serve more than five lots.

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

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature

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

12. Theme: WFH Properties has chosen names that they consider appropriate for the locality. In this regard the names and their relevance are detailed in the table below:

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Fredrica Crescent (applicant’s preference)	Name of daughter of the original landowner Frederick Sidwell
Robina Crescent (alternative)	Name of daughter of the original landowner Frederick Sidwell
Fanny Crescent (alternative)	Name of daughter of the original landowner Frederick Sidwell

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 private way, suiting the form and layout.

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 17 November 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 Runanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Maru (Ngāti Maru Rūnanga Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust)

· Ngāti Pāoa (Ngāti Paoa Trust Board)

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Orakei

· Ngāti Whanaunga (Ngāti Whanaunga Incorporated)

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Te Patukirikiri (Te Patukirikiri Incorporated)

· Waikato – Tainui (Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated)

· Ngāti Manuhiri

· Ngāti Wai.

22. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days), no responses had been received.

23. Dependent on the scale of the development and its level of significance, not all road naming applications receive comments from mana whenua.

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

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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 Land Information New Zealand which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. Land Information New Zealand provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	21 Sidwell Road Scheme Plan	29
b ⇩	21 Sidwell Road Locality Plan	31

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove - Subdivision Advisor, Orewa

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

Draft Contributions Policy 2022, Variation A

File No.: CP2023/00577

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback on the proposal (draft Contributions Policy 2022, Variation A) to add to the Contributions Policy 2022 projects planned to be delivered beyond 2031 to support growth in Drury.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Development contributions are charges that recover from new developments a fair share of the cost of the council’s investment in infrastructure. To date our contributions policy has only recovered a share of cost of our infrastructure investment planned in the next ten years.

3. The council has agreed to add projects beyond 2031 to the Contributions Policy for the Investment Priority Areas identified in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 in stages, starting with Drury. This will ensure early developers pay a fair share of the cost of the cumulative impact of growth on the council’s need to invest in infrastructure.

4. The Contributions Policy 2022 was adopted in December 2021 and provides for the recovery of $399 million of the investment planned to be delivered in Drury in the period to 2031. The contributions price in Drury under this policy, including regional and sub-regional charges, is $22,564 per household equivalent unit (HUE – a house between 100m² and 249m²). We are now proposing to vary this policy to add investments we plan to deliver beyond 2031 to support development in Drury.

5. The original proposal was consulted on in late 2021 as part of the consultation on the region-wide Contributions Policy 2022. At that time, the majority of local boards were in support of the changes proposed in the draft Contributions Policy 2021

6. The Finance and Performance Committee considered the report on the proposal, which included local board views, at its meeting on 9 December 2021. The committee agreed to defer a decision on adding investment beyond 2031 to the Drury area to allow for the provision of further information requested by developers and additional time to make submissions once that information was provided.

7. The original proposal consulted on was revised accordingly and more information produced. The updated proposal included $2,470 billion of investment in Drury beyond 2031 of which $1.142 billion was to be funded by development contributions. This would raise the average development contribution price in Drury by $60,687 to $83,251. Public consultation opened on 13 September 2022 for eight weeks, instead of the usual four weeks, and closed on 8 November 2022.

8. Sixty submissions were received, 33 of which were from those in the development community. The proposal was supported by 35 per cent of all submitters with 50 percent not in support. A further 15 per cent did not clearly state their views on the proposal.

9. This report summarises the key points made in submissions and notes officers’ initial analysis of the issues raised.

10. Local board feedback is sought to inform the Governing Body’s consideration of the adoption of the proposal planned for April 2023. The report to the Governing Body will also be updated reflecting officers' final analysis of the responses to submissions, updates reflecting additional work that has been undertaken since consultation and in particular to incorporate the latest economic forecasts and recent government decisions on their investment in Drury.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve feedback on the draft Contributions Policy 2022, Variation A which proposes to add to the Contributions Policy 2022 projects planned to be delivered beyond 2031 to support growth in Drury.

Horopaki

Context

Development contributions and infrastructure investment

11. Development contributions (DCs) allow for an equitable and proportionate share of the total cost of growth-related capital expenditure to be recovered from the development community. The Contributions Policy sets out how the council will recover from new development an appropriate and fair share of the cost of infrastructure investment attributable to growth.

Growth and infrastructure investment

12. Auckland’s population is expected to continue to grow in the next ten years on top of the rapid population growth we have experienced in the last decade, bringing the projected population to 1.8 million early next decade. We are forecasting the construction of 145,800 new dwellings in the next ten years. To support the development enabled by the Auckland Unitary Plan, we are facing both immediate and longer-term demands for infrastructure in growth areas. If we do not adequately plan for the delivery and funding of this infrastructure, the cumulative effects of this development could lead to an unfair rates burden on future ratepayers or a risk of infrastructure shortfalls for future residents.

Drury

13. Drury-Opāheke is projected to grow by 22,000 new houses over the next thirty years. The proposal identified that an infrastructure investment of $2,869 billion will be required to support this growth. This investment will include a public and active transport led approach to transport infrastructure, parks and open spaces, and a new community facility that will include a local pool, leisure centre and library.

14. Investment in Drury will take around 30 years to deliver. The Contributions Policy 2022 only requires developers to contribute to the $399 million of investment we plan to make over the next 10 years. Without DC funding for a share of the $2.470 billion investment planned beyond 2031, there is a risk that those undertaking development will not contribute a fair, equitable, and proportionate portion of the capital expenditure necessary to service long-term growth. This risk could lead to shortfalls in the provision of infrastructure for the future residents of Drury and additional and/or additional demands on the city’s ratepayers.

Consultation 2021 and decisions

15. In 2021 the council consulted on a proposal to add investments planned to be delivered in Drury beyond 2031 to the 2022 policy and over the next year to the other Investment Priority Areas (IPAs) identified in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031. The IPAs are Inner Northwest, City Rail Link stations and Auckland Housing Programme (AHP) areas (Tāmaki, Mangere, Northcote, Oranga, and Mt Roskill). This would avoid an unfair rates burden on future ratepayers or the risk of infrastructure shortfalls for the future residents of new developments. The majority of local boards supported the original proposal.

a) The Finance and Performance Committee considered a report on the proposal at its meeting on 9 December 2021 (FIN/2021/119). The committee agreed in principle to add investments beyond 2031 to the Investment Priority Areas but deferred a decision on adding investment beyond 2031 to the Drury area. This was intended to allow the provision of more information to developers and other interested parties and allow more time for them to make further submissions with the benefit of this information.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Updated proposal for consultation in 2022

16. In response to the council’s direction (resolution number FIN/2021/119 clause b)), staff undertook substantial additional work internally, commissioned five external expert reviews of our methodology and key economic issues, and sought expert transport planning and engineering advice on the proposed investments.

17. The original proposal consulted on was revised by updating our forecasts for the timing and location of growth within Drury and of construction costs, land price inflation, and interest rates.

18. External reviews were sought on our growth forecasting, cost estimation, and approach to calculating the share of costs to be recovered from developers. Recommendations from these reviews were applied to our calculations of the contributions charges for projects to be delivered beyond 2031 in Drury for inclusion in the proposal consulted on. These changes will also be considered for incorporation into the wider contributions policy as part of our future policy reviews.

19. Additional analysis of the distribution of the benefits of the proposed transport projects within Drury was also undertaken. The proposal consulted on allocated the transport costs to be recovered from development contributions to four new funding areas within Drury and to the relevant neighbouring areas. Adjustments were also made to neighbouring funding areas to reflect the benefits from community facilities investments, the regional transport funding area for wider transport benefits, and to the regional community facilities funding area for the library accordingly and more information produced.

20. Following completion of the work above the investments planned for beyond 2031 included in the consultation were:

a) $1.882 million in transport including arterial roads and key elements of the collector network to provide an integrated public and private transport network and active transport investment connecting Drury to the wider city (in addition to the $243 million council has already committed to invest before 2031)

b) $403 million for 43 new parks, with a total land requirement of 32.4 hectares (in addition to the $156 million council has already committed to invest before 2031)

c) $185 million for a single multi-purpose facility including a community facility, leisure centre, library, and local pool.

21. Stormwater requirements for Drury beyond 2031 will be identified and added to the contributions policy as more information becomes available on the location and form of development.

22. Of the $2.470 billion of projects, the proposal identified for delivery beyond 2031, $1.142 billion was proposed to be funded by developers through our contributions policy. This additional revenue requirement would raise the contributions price for Drury by an average of an additional $60,687, per household equivalent unit (HUE) to a total of on average $83,251 per HUE. Different charges would apply to different geographical areas based on the benefits accruing to each area.

Consultation

23. Public consultation opened on 13 September 2022 for eight weeks and closed on 8 November 2022. Additional information provided included 13 documents and two spreadsheets to allow submitters to better understand the proposal. These can be found on the council’s Have Your Say page.

24. During the consultation period, those from the development industry requested further information and in response the following additional materials were provided:

· Transport cost estimates for Drury. Further details on individual construction cost elements for transport projects

· Growth and HUE forecast. Spreadsheet outlining data used to forecast growth

25. Around 336 stakeholders were directly approached to advise them of the consultation. A media release was issued, and an article appeared in Our Auckland at the start of the consultation period. The consultation was also promoted through the council’s Engagement and People’s Panel newsletters. Forty-four people participated in the Have Your Say events held to support the consultation.

26. Two online and two face-to-face Have Your Say events were held. Staff also attended a drop-in session in Drury organised by Waka Kotahi, two meetings organised by Drury developers, and a session organised by the Property Council of New Zealand. There were 44 attendees across all events representing 39 organisations. Officers also provided briefings to Waka Kotahi and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development.

27. An opportunity for developers to present their submissions directly to the Governing Body at a Have Your Say event was provided on 14 December 2022. Developers were given a ten-minute slot with five minutes for their presentation followed by five minutes for questions from the decision-makers. The mayor and 16 councillors, heard presentations from 14 organisations at the session.

Feedback and Analysis

28. Sixty submissions were received. Overall, the proposal was supported by 35 per cent of submitters with 50 percent opposing it. A further 15 per cent did not clearly state their support or otherwise to the proposal. Key themes raised in the submissions are identified below. The submissions received in the consultation are available to elected members on the council’s meeting management system Nexus.

29. 26 individuals and one Māori organisation provided feedback. Of these, 69 per cent were in support of this proposal, 15 per cent did not support the proposal while the views of 15 per cent of submitters were not clearly stated.

30. Eleven of the individuals who supported the proposal commented that it was fair that developers should pay their fair share towards infrastructure. Those who did not state their support or otherwise thought that the council should support infrastructure development.

31. Thirty-three responses were from those in the development industry. Responses from the industry show that 79 per cent opposed the proposal, six per cent supported it and 15 per cent did not state a clear view. Key themes from the developers’ feedback are outlined below.

Impact of higher development contributions

Feedback

32. Developers’ submissions noted the following concerns that higher DCs will:

· lead to higher house prices as developers seek to recover the increased costs. Developers who had already purchased land commented that they will be particularly disadvantaged as the increased DCs have not been included in the costs of their development

· lead to Drury being treated unfairly in relation to the rest of the city with much higher DCs

· discourage the construction of affordable housing as developers seek to recover higher costs with more expensive developments

· redirect development from Drury to other areas of the city with lower DC prices. Lower DCs are charged in wealthy established central parts of the city where infrastructure is already in place whereas incoming residents to Drury, where affordable housing can be built, are less able to afford higher DCs

· encourage land banking in Drury until house prices rise further or the policy changes.

Analysis

33. For developers who have purchased land recently, higher DCs will put pressure on their margins. While staff acknowledge the impact a substantial increase in contributions charges is required if developers are to meet a fair share of cost of the investments required to support Drury’s development. The DCs charged in Drury will be higher than those in other parts of the city but this will reflect the council’s commitment to invest in infrastructure in Drury.

34. In feedback received from the original consultation, developers expressed concern about the equity of charging them now for investments that wouldn’t be delivered until the next decade. Our independent expert advice confirms the council’s previously presented analysis: that while the physical infrastructure wouldn’t be delivered until later, current landowners still benefit from the commitment to deliver in terms of higher land values. Furthermore, development occurring during the early years of this policy still contributes to the need for planned capital expenditure that will be incurred beyond 10 years’ time.

35. The independent economic consultants were asked for their views on the equity of our proposal to consider the likely impact of the proposal on house prices, and the viability of development in Drury.

36. The consultants concluded that while the DC price will lower the price developers are willing to pay for land, this reduction is much lower than the increase in land value arising from the planning changes that enable housing development.

37. There may be an indirect effect on the sequence of sites getting taken up for new housing across the city in the short term as development adjusts around a new equilibrium. However, this will be small relative to other market factors.

38. Higher DCs may be an additional cost to development and could be argued to increase the return to holding land undeveloped. However, earlier delivery of infrastructure funded by DCs is likely to accelerate development.

39. The full report was included in the supporting documents pack released as part of the consultation process.

Complexity with a 30-year time frame

Feedback

40. Comments were provided on the accuracy of information on infrastructure requirements planned over a 30-year timeframe, including the assurance that revenue collected today will be used for future investment in infrastructure. Other comments from submitters include:

· possibility that infrastructure will not be needed resulting in over collection of DCs

· impact of inflation on delivery of projects over time adds complexity

· complexities arise around the accuracy of the price of infrastructure over a 30-year timeframe creating uncertainty. For example, when trying to estimate things such as inflation, delivery risks, costs of infrastructure, and future infrastructure demand over a 30-year period

· doubt that benefits will be received by early developers

· actions the council will have to take to ensure money collected today will be spent on delivery of the projects over 30-year period

· it is not clear what happens to the initially unspent portions of development contributions paid, but intended to fund works that are 1, 2 or 3 decades in the future.

Analysis

41. Forecasting capital expenditure over a 30-year horizon inevitably involves a higher degree of uncertainty than capex over the horizon of the 10-year Budget 2021-2031. However, the Local Government Act 2002 allows for development contributions to be recovered to fund capital expenditure to be incurred beyond the LTP period (10 years). The council may also vary the mix of projects for which development contributions will be used if there is a relevant change of circumstances relating to those projects, and the overall level of contribution does not increase.

42. Our contributions policy is reviewed every three years to ensure that our planned infrastructure investment continues to meet the need of the developing community and is appropriately costed using the latest available information. This enables us to respond to changing circumstances, while ensuring that our charges remain fair for developers.

Consideration of other sources of funding

Feedback

43. Several submitters considered the council should have given more consideration to alternative funding mechanisms before deciding to impose DCs. Submitters noted the council:

· has not demonstrated sufficient consideration of alternative funding methods such as Infrastructure Funding and Financing through the Crown Infrastructure Partners

· should consider the use of other funding and financing tools – such as targeted rates, congestion charging, Special Purpose Vehicles through the Funding and Financing Act and Specified Development Areas through the Urban Development Act – alongside DCs.

· should consider using targeted rates to cover the costs of infrastructure that cannot easily be identified with sufficient certainty, subject to these rates being ringfenced for sole use on infrastructure to facilitate growth in the specific area in which the targeted rate applies.

Analysis

44. The council’s Revenue and Financing Policy notes that at present DCs will be used to fund growth infrastructure. However, the Revenue and Financing Policy also makes provision for the use of other tools such as targeted rates and would also allow the use of levies under the Infrastructure Funding and Finance Act. All these tools have the same effective revenue for the council and cost for developers and landowners (the net present value is the same) but are triggered at different times.

45. These options remain open to the council and can be used in combination with development contributions. The first step under any of these options is to establish the investments required to support growth in the IPAs and the appropriate share to be recovered from developers or landowners. All tools need to be applied early in the process to ensure early developments pay their share. The potential application of these funding tools will be considered in the advice to council in April.

Accuracy and assumptions used in the model

Feedback

46. Comments were provided on the accuracy of information on infrastructure requirements planned over a 30-year timeframe, including the assurance that revenue collected today will be used for future investment in infrastructure. Submitters also noted:

· concern that the costings for the various projects incorporate excessive assumptions in respect of construction cost, contingency funding cost, and general inflation.

· the recent plan changes which have not been considered

· the model includes invalid assumptions concerning developer funded mitigation works and DC funded works, likely to lead to double dipping and over-recovery.

47. Comments on projects were also provided:

· the new policy encourages the council to design projects that are “gold plated” and have higher initial capital expenditure

· changes in transport patterns (e.g., mode share, e-bike subscriptions and sharing platforms) will influence future transport requirements.

· the full list of transportation projects arrived at by Supporting Growth Alliance has never been justified as being required to mitigate the effects of development in Drury East

· an independent audit of the proposed projects and their intended scale is requested to help ascertain how much of the increased cost relates to local rather than general factors

· the policy projects listed assumes that the council will purchase land from developers when in practice it is likely to require the land and infrastructure on it to be vested without charge or at a discount rate pursuant to the consent process will not incur these costs.

Analysis

48. A formal review was undertaken of the methodology the council uses to set DC charges. To do this, three external advisors were contracted to review our methods for growth forecasting, cost estimation, and how we assess the beneficiaries that underpin the DC charge calculations.

49. The feedback from our earlier consultation, the recommendations of these reviews, and our updated data models have allowed the DC calculation methodology to be refined to better suit the specific circumstances of Drury. The financial models were updated following a review conducted in November 2021. No errors in logic or in the functionality were identified in a review conducted in November 2022.

Updates to proposal

50. Further analysis of the feedback raised by developers will be presented to the Governing Body for decision making, planned for April 2023 and will include potential changes to the proposed amendment. Officers are in the process of updating the proposal to incorporate further work we have undertaken since consultation concluded to:

· respond as appropriate to issues raised in submissions including in the key areas noted below

· refine the projects and project costings in the proposal including

o estimates of developer mitigation - roading investments that developers will be required to provide as a condition of consent

o property costing

o investment decisions by the government

o community facilities funding areas

o transport funding areas.

· update the forecasts of the following factors to reflect the latest economic conditions and predictions:

o growth in the Drury area – reflecting recent plan change decisions

o interest rates

o construction cost inflation

o land price inflation.

Compliance

51. Some submitters expressed a view that the proposal is not legally compliant and that there may be a case for a judicial review. Staff advice on the Contributions Policy is given in the context of highly prescriptive provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) which cover the content of a contributions policy and the assessment of contributions. These provisions are the only source of the council’s power to require development contributions and must be strictly complied with.

52. Staff have reviewed the proposal and will consider the matters raised in submissions giving consideration to the legislative requirements in the LGA, including specific content requirements for development contributions policies, and the council’s Revenue and Financing Policy.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

53. Recommendations in this report have a neutral climate impact as they relate to the funding of capital investment rather than decisions on the activities to be undertaken.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

54. The information presented on the projects included in the draft Contributions Policy 2022 Variation A was developed in conjunction with the following council-controlled organisations and council units:

· Auckland Transport

· Community Facilities

· Community and Social Policy.

55. The Chief Economist Unit and Research Investigations and Monitoring Unit worked with us on growth and economic forecasts, the impact of higher development contributions on the pace of development, and on land and house prices.

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

Local impacts and local board views

56. The Drury funding area in the proposal is within the Franklin and Papakura local board areas. The recommendations in this report support a higher level of infrastructure investment in the Drury area and sets a higher DC price in this area.

57. Local board feedback is sought to inform the Governing Body’s consideration of the adoption of the Contribution Policy 2022, Variation A in April 2023.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

58. Development contributions are assessed against the demand that different types of development generate on council infrastructure.

59. Māori developments are assessed under broader development types based on the demand they generate. For example, kaumātua housing is treated the same as retirement villages, and marae are considered under community facilities. As more Māori developments occur, evidence of demand generation can be used to reclassify developments or create new development types.

60. Eleven iwi authorities (with mana whenua interests) in the Drury area were contacted prior to the start of consultation to seek expressions of interest in discussing and providing feedback on the proposed changes.

61. All iwi authorities were also notified when consultation opened, further advising of how they could have their say.

62. Opportunities to present to the Mana Whenua forum, the Independent Māori Statutory Board and other council forums were explored, however, this topic was not seen as a priority area at the time.

63. One response supporting this proposal was received from mana whenua who considered this was a fairer way to fund the required infrastructure.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

64. There are no financial implications from requesting local boards views.

65. The proposal provides for additional investment by council beyond 2031 to support growth in Drury of $2.470 billion. The draft Contributions Policy, Variation A provides for $1.142 billion of this investment to be funded by DCs.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

66. The recommendation requesting local boards views does not present any risk. The risks associated with amending the contributions policy will be set out in the report to the Governing Body planned for April 2023.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

67. Feedback from the public consultation will be reported to the Governing Body in February 2023.

68. Staff will provide advice, options and responses to the issues raised in the feedback to the Governing Body to assist in their decision making.

69. A decision-making report to the Governing Body is planned for April 2023 and will include potential changes to the draft policy and local board feedback.

70. All local board feedback is due on 3 March 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

Local board feedback on the draft Future for Local Government report

File No.: CP2023/00121

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide feedback on the draft report released by the Future for Local Government Review Panel to inform Auckland Council’s submission.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Future for Local Government Review Panel released its draft report (the Report) for consultation on 28 October 2022.

3. Auckland Council is preparing a submission in response to the Report. Submissions close on 28 February 2023.

4. The Report makes 29 recommendations on a wide range of areas including: revitalising citizen-led democracy, achieving Tiriti-based partnership between Māori and local government, the approach to allocating roles and functions across different players, achieving genuine partnership between central and local government, more equitable funding, designing a local government system to enable the change we need, and putting in place effective system stewardship.

5. Auckland Council has previously reached positions on some of the Report’s recommendations through programmes of work or engagement with central government. These positions will be the starting point for preparing the submission but there will be an opportunity for this council to reconsider those positions.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the draft report released by the Future for Local Government Review Panel to inform Auckland Council’s submission.

Horopaki

Context

6. The Minister for Local Government established the Future for Local Government Review (the Review) in April 2021 and established a Review Panel (the Panel). The purpose of the Review is to identify how our local democracy and governance system needs to evolve over the next 30 years, to improve the wellbeing of communities and the environment and to actively embody the Treaty partnership.

7. The Panel released its Interim Report in October 2021. The case for change described a local government under pressure without all the levers needed to deliver on community wellbeing. The sector therefore needs to work collaboratively with others including central government, iwi/Māori organisations, the business sector and community groups. It noted that trust had broken down and that there is a need for greater understanding between central government and local government.

8. The Panel released its Draft Report He mata whāriki, he matawhānui on 28 October 2022. The Report can be found at: https://www.futureforlocalgovernment.govt.nz/reports/

9. The Report makes 29 recommendations and asks a range of questions intended to inform the Final Report to the Minister.

10. The Panel states that we are in a period of change (climate change, pandemics, biodiversity loss, social and economic inequity). This is causing many of our communities to lose trust in democratic institutions and to disengage. Government reform is creating further uncertainty for the role of local government in communities.

11. The challenges facing Aotearoa New Zealand are too big for central government to address alone. Local government has a fundamental role to play in responding to these complex issues and improving the wellbeing of communities. This will require renewal and change (shifts) to many aspects of the local government system.

12. The Panel previously indicated five shifts are needed to make this change: strengthened local democracy, authentic relationships with hapū/iwi and Māori, a focus on wellbeing, genuine partnership between central and local government, and more equitable funding. Two additional shifts – system design and stewardship – will also need to be considered.

13. The Report sets out recommendations and asks questions in relation to: revitalising citizen-led democracy, Tiriti-based partnership between Māori and local government, allocating roles and functions, local government as champion and activator of wellbeing, replenishing and building on representative democracy, and equitable funding and finance.

14. Following the release of the Report, the Review Panel undertook a further round of engagement with the local government sector across New Zealand. This included three in-person sessions with local board members in Auckland on 5 and 6 December 2022.

15. The Governing Body has approved the preparation of an Auckland Council submission in response to the Report. Submissions are due by 28 February 2023.

16. The Panel’s Final Report is due with the Minister by June 2023. Any response to the Panel’s final recommendations will be a decision for the next government.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17. The purpose of the Review is highly relevant to local government and Auckland Council.

18. Some recommendations in the Report are of a functional order (e.g. allocation of roles), some more foundational (e.g. Te Tiriti based partnerships) and some about the ‘system’ we work within. The Report does not necessarily set out all the relationships/interdependencies between the components.

19. It is proposed that the council’s submission draws these connections where possible to ensure there is a clear understanding of how all elements of the future system will work together and potential impacts and risks. Council should also seek further clarity on the future funding framework for local government and the pathway to build the required capability and capacity to carry out its future role.

20. The council has formed positions in previous terms on a number of recommendations contained in the Report. These will be the starting point for preparing the submission but there will be an opportunity for this council to reconsider those positions through the drafting process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

21. The Report acknowledges that councils have a significant role in mitigating and adapting to climate impacts in their areas. It also notes that the future climate challenge for local government is likely to be greater than the challenge it has faced over the past 30 years to address the infrastructure deficit.

22. Current funding streams to manage the impacts of climate events are already being challenged, placing many communities at risk and requiring a long-term approach to addressing these issues. The sums involved to mitigate and respond to climate effects are likely to be significant.

23. Accordingly, the Report recommends (recommendation 23) that central government develops an intergenerational fund for climate change, with the application of the fund requiring appropriate regional and local decision-making input.

24. In its submission on the Draft National Adaptation Plan earlier this year, Auckland Council argued that central government funding is crucial and must have a long-term focus.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. Council-control organiastion chairpersons and chief executives have been provided with a summary and high-level analysis of the Report.

26. Council-control organiastion staff are included in the experts across the council group who will develop the council’s submission for approval.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27. The Report proposes that putting wellbeing at the core of council’s purpose and its roles and functions will unlock greater wellbeing outcomes for communities. Councils have an opportunity to strengthen and expand their role in three key ways: as anchor institutions, place-makers, and systems networkers and convenors.

28. The Report also proposes a framework to guide the allocation of roles and functions between different actors: central government, local government, hapū/iwi and community. The framework starts with a local-first approach (the subsidiarity principle) and is guided by te ao Māori values.

29. The Panel has engaged with local board members over the course of the Review in July 2021, March 2022 and most recently on 5 and 6 December 2022 through three separate in-person sessions held across Auckland.

30. Local board views on the Report are sought and will be incorporated into the council’s submission as appropriate. Formal local board feedback will be appended to council’s submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

31. A finding of the Review is that the system needs to ensure a more meaningful expression of rangatiratanga and a more culturally specific exercise of kāwanatanga by councils, with te ao Māori values reflected at all levels of the system.

32. In response, the Report proposes fundamental changes to Te Tiriti o Waitangi provisions of the Local Government Act 2002, a strategic role for Māori in identifying and addressing priority outcomes that will lift community wellbeing, as well as strengthened specific mechanisms for partnership and engagement (including the incorporation of tikanga Māori).

33. It also proposes improvements to Māori representation at the council table, and a concerted investment in the capability and capacity of both local government and Māori to build and maintain a Tiriti-based partnership in local governance.

34. Staff have engaged with iwi on the system shifts proposed by the Panel at earlier stages in the Review process. Now that the Report has been released, iwi have been asked for their views to be considered for inclusion in council’s submission.

35. There has been ongoing engagement with IMSB staff on the Review and they will have an opportunity to review the council’s submission.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

36. The submission will be developed within existing resources.

37. The recommendations of the Review Panel are multi-faceted and there is insufficient information to anticipate or quantify financial implications for the council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

38. No risks have been identified in relation to preparation of council’s submission.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. Staff are drafting a submission for the Governing Body’s approval at its meeting on 23 February 2023.

40. There will be a briefing on the Draft Report for local board members on 23 January 2023.

41. Local board views to be considered for incorporation into council’s submission must be received by 2 February 2023.

42. Formal feedback to be appended to council submissions must be received by 23 February 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Te Pūrongo a Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau Ngā Huanga Māori 2021/2022 - Auckland Council Group Māori Outcomes Report 2021-2022 (Under Separate Cover)

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent Decision: Rodney Local Board feedback on the Natural and Built Environment Bill and Spatial Planning Bill to inform Auckland Council's submission on the Resource Management Reform	51

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Rodney Local Board Hōtaka Kaupapa – Policy Schedule for February 2023	79

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Rodney Local Board workshop record 14 December 2022	83
b ⇩	Rodney Local Board workshop record 1 February 2022	85
c ⇩	Rodney Local Board workshop record 8 February 2023	87

Rodney Local Board

15 February 2023

Auckland Council's performance report: Rodney Local Board for quarter two 2022/2023

File No.: CP2023/00243

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive the integrated performance report for quarter two, 1 October – 31 December 2022.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report includes financial performance, progress against work programmes, key challenges the board should be aware of and any risks to delivery against the 2022/2023 work programme.

3. The key activity updates from this period are:

· ID386: Operational Grant for Art Centre Helensville

· ID390: Support and Activation – Rodney Halls

· ID20513: Huapai, Matua Road – develop new neighbourhood park

· ID30864: Green Road – deliver outcomes identified in the masterplan and pathway plan

· ID18275: Big Omaha Wharf – rebuild toilet block

· ID631: Helensville construction and demolition waste minimisation programme.

4. All operating departments with agreed work programmes have provided an update against their work programme delivery. Activities are reported with a status of green (on track), amber (some risk or issues, which are being managed) or grey (cancelled, deferred, or merged). The following activities are reported with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk):

· ID30619: Rodney Town Centre Revitalisation

· ID30136: Dida Park Drive, Huapai – develop new neighbourhood park.

5. Auckland Council (council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of half-year financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2023.

6. Due to these obligations, the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public.

7. The Customer and Community Services capex budget has been revised to incorporate delayed delivery or earlier commencement of individual projects or other changes that are of material value.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the integrated performance report for quarter two ending 31 December 2022.

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the agenda report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group half-year results for 2022/2023 are released to the New Zealand Exchange (NZX), which are expected to be made public on or about 28 February 2023.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Rodney Local Board has an approved 2022/2023 work programme (Attachment A to the agenda report) for the following operating departments:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services

· Auckland Emergency Management.

9. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

10. The graph below identifies work programme activity by RAG status (red, amber, green and grey) which measures the performance of the activity. It shows the percentage of work programme activities that are on track (green), in progress but with issues that are being managed (amber), and activities that have significant issues (red) and activities that have been cancelled/deferred/merged (grey).

Graph 2: Work programme by RAG status

11. The graph below shows the status of activities and the stage of the activity in each departments work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme by activity status and department

Chart, bar chart, waterfall chart

Description automatically generated

Key activity updates

12. Key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programme for quarter two include:

· ID386: Operational grant for Art Centre Helensville. In quarter two at Art Centre Helensville there were 11 programmes delivered to a total of 3016 attendees. Highlights were Arts in the Ville with the centre opening extended hours across Labour Weekend and four exhibitions on view. Other quarter two exhibitions included Scorched Earth featuring three artists responding to environmental concerns specific to Helensville

· ID390: Support and Activation – Rodney Halls. In quarter two Mahurangi East Community Centre operated at close to full capacity from Monday to Saturday with regular bookings taking up most of the space. A number of community events included Dog Day Out, Mahurangi East Fire Brigade Award night, NZ Youth Sailing Awards and Snells Beach School quiz night. Wellsford District Community Centre saw a steady stream of regular bookings which catered to fitness, youth, mental health and special interest groups

· ID20513: Huapai, Matua Road – develop new neighbourhood park. Resource consent has been approved and procurement of physical works is underway

· ID30864: Green Road – deliver outcomes identified in the masterplan and pathway plan. Design work to develop the detailed pathway plan is nearing completion. Maintenance of revegetated areas continues

· ID18275: Big Omaha Wharf – rebuild toilet block. Arborist approval has been received for the new proposed location of the replacement toilet in the picnic area. Detailed design drawings were received for the prefabricated Permaloo for review. This project is being delivered in collaboration with the heritage team

· ID631: Helensville construction and demolition waste minimisation programme. This project has seen 88 percent diversion from landfill for waste products from the new home build. Approximately three tonnes of material from one building site has been diverted to other uses such as reuse, sale and upcycling. Work is being done to have more specialised bins manufactured to allow for more sites to be taken on.

Activities with significant issues

13. The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments with a status of red (behind delivery, significant risk). These activities are also noted under the activities on hold section:

· ID30619: Rodney Town Centre Revitalisation. This project is being unbundled to progress the renewal components. Once the Warkworth Town Centre Plan is adopted by the local board the upgrade components will progress. However, until such time this project is on hold.

· ID30136: Dida Park Drive, Huapai – develop new neighbourhood park. A proposed expansion of scope and development outcome is being prepared to workshop with the local board for their consideration and approval in March 2023. This development project will remain on hold while the proposed options are being worked through with the local board. Thereafter the project will progress to include community consultation, detail design and commencement of physical works.

Activities on hold

14. The following work programme activities have been identified by operating departments as on hold:

· ID36673: Rautawhiri Park – renew playspace and open space assets. This project is in the initiate phase with works being scoped and consenting identified

· ID31411: Waterloo Reserve Milldale. This is a financial contribution to the developer-led work at Waterloo Reserve. The timeframe for the transaction has not yet been confirmed

· ID30623: Shoesmith Hall – refurbish facility. This project is on hold until the future and further progress of this site is known

· Harry James Reserve – renew playspace, pathways, carpark and drainage. This project is on hold until the local board approve the scope which is expected in June 2023

· ID24230: Point Wells Recreation Reserve – renew accessway and associated assets. This project will be delivered in the next financial year and will be delivered in conjunction with other Rodney area carpark renewals

· ID26249: Goodall Reserve – renew skate park and minor assets. Initial scoping has commenced

· ID2471: Whangateau Harbour Omaha Estuary – investigate and renew coastal assets. This project is on hold pending the shoreline adaptation plan and the potential re-orientation to redefine the scope of the project

· ID2463: Point Wells Reserve Foreshore – renew seawall. This project is on hold pending the shoreline adaptation plan and the potential re-orientation to redefine the scope of the project.

Changes to the local board work programme

Deferred activities

15. The following work programme activity is deferred from the 2022/2023 work programme:

· ID3097: Port Albert Reserve lease. This item has been deferred until a seismic assessment is undertaken to the building used by the Wellsford Rugby Football Club.

Activities merged with other activities for delivery

16. The following work programme activity has been merged with other activities for efficient delivery:

· ID33273: Port Albert Recreation Reserve – investigate options for grandstand. This project has been bundled to be completed under ID33271: Port Albert Recreation Reserve – refurbish toilet, investigate options for grandstand and renew open space assets.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

17. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

18. Work programmes were approved in June 2022 and delivery is underway. Should significant changes to any projects be required, climate change impacts will be assessed as part of the relevant reporting requirements. Any changes to the timing of approved projects are unlikely to result in changes to emissions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

19. When developing the work programmes, council group impacts and views are presented to the local boards. As this is an information only report there are no further impacts identified.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. This report informs the Rodney Local Board of the performance for the quarter ending 31 December 2022.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

21. The local board’s work programme contains a number of activities aimed at delivering on Māori outcomes for the 2022/2023 financial year.

22. Highlights for the quarter two reporting period on activities with a Māori outcome focus are outlined below:

· Wellsford Library has been selected as one of five pilot sites involved in He Kupenga Horopounamu, a project to develop a new service model in Auckland libraries to achieve better outcomes for whānau Māori

· All libraries in Rodney continue to support the growth of te reo Māori and promote Māori outcomes in or communities through the use of Māori greetings and incorporation of te reo Māori into pre-schools sessions.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

23. This report is provided to enable the Rodney Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering its 2022/2023 work programmes. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

24. Auckland Council (council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the NZ Stock Exchange (NZX). As a result, council is subject to obligations under the NZX Main Board & Debt Market Listing Rules and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 sections 97 and 461H. These obligations restrict the release of half-year financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX on 28 February 2023.

25. Due to these obligations, the financial performance attached to the quarterly report is excluded from the public.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. While the risk of non-delivery of the entire work programme is rare, the likelihood for risk relating to individual activities does vary. Capital projects for instance, are susceptible to more risk as on-time and on-budget delivery is dependent on weather conditions, approvals (e.g., building consents) and is susceptible to market conditions.

27. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Activities with significant issues’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. The local board will receive the next performance update following the end of quarter three, 31 March 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Rodney Local Board 2022/2023 work programme (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Rodney Local Board Financial Performance report - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Robyn Joynes – Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Brent Bailey
Deputy Chairperson	Louise Johnston
Members	Michelle Carmichael
	Mark Dennis
	Tim Holdgate
	Colin Smith
	Geoff Upson
	Ivan Wagstaff
	Guy Wishart

Local Board Member	Organisation	Position
Brent Bailey	Central Shooters Inc Auckland Shooting Club Royal NZ Yacht Squadron	President Member Member
Michelle Carmichael	Fight the Tip Tiaki te Whenua Incorporated Tapora School Board of Trustees	Deputy chairperson Staff representative
Mark Dennis	Helensville Tennis Club Parakai Springs Complex South Kaipara Community Patrol Steering Group	Elected member Operations manager Member
Tim Holdgate	Landowners Contractors Protection Association Agricultural & Pastoral Society Warkworth	Vice chairman Committee member
Louise Johnston	Blackbridge Environmental Protection Society	Treasurer
Colin Smith
Geoff Upson
Ivan Wagstaff
Guy Wishart	Huapai Kumeū Lions Kaipara ki Mahurangi LEC KumeūCommunity Centre Kumeu Small Landowners Assoc Future Kumeū Inc Committee Kumeū Live (Music Events)	President and zone chairperson Member Committee member Member Member Manager

Author	Rita Bento-Allpress - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987