Agenda of Rodney Local Board - Wednesday, 15 March 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) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday 22 February 2023 (deferred from Wednesday 15 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: Upper Waitematā Ecology Network

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The Upper Waitematā Ecology Network have requested a deputation to provide an overview of their 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) Thank Charissa Snjiders and Tim Johnson from the Upper Waitematā Ecology Network for their presentation and attendance.

8.2 Deputation: Friends of Awa Matakanakana Inc (FOAM)

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Friends of Awa Matakanakana Inc (FOAM) have requested a deputation to inform the local board of its activities and issues to be addressed in the Matakana and Glen Eden river catchments.

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) thank Friends of Awa Matakanakana Inc (FOAM) for their presentation and attendance.

8.3 Deputation: The Northern Action Group

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. William Foster has requested a deputation on behalf of the Northern Action Group to brief the Rodney Local Board on the group’s activities and topics it would like to work with the local board in 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) thank Mr Foster and the Northern Action Group for their presentation and attendance.

8.4 Deputation: Leigh Library

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Representatives from Leigh Library have requested a deputation to discuss its annual grant from the Rodney Local Board.

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) thank the representatives from Leigh Library for their attendance and presentation.

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.

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 March 2023

Grant a new community lease to Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated for land at Manuhiri Reserve, Pukemateko Reserve and Tuna Place Reserve, Omaha South

File No.: CP2023/01465

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new community lease to Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated for land at Manuhiri Reserve, Pukemateko Reserve and Tuna Place Reserve, Omaha South.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated (the society) currently hold a lease for land at Manuhiri Reserve and Pukemateko Reserve, Omaha South, on which its tennis courts and associated improvements (fencing and lighting) are located. The lease reached final expiry on 30 September 2021. The lease agreement is holding over on a month-by-month basis on its existing terms and conditions until terminated or a new lease is granted.

3. In addition to the courts and associated improvements on Manuhiri and Pukemateko Reserves, the society owns and maintains a third set of tennis courts located at Tuna Place, Omaha South. The existing lease omitted to include these courts. The proposed new lease will include this set of courts at Tuna Place.

4. The society has formally applied for a new community lease for land at Omaha South on which its three sets of courts and associated improvements are located.

5. The progression of the new lease was identified and approved by the local board as part of the Community Facilities: Community Leases Work Programme 2021/2022 (item number 1065) at its local board business meeting on 16 June 2021 (resolution RD/2021/265).

6. The society provides the facilities that directly support the game of tennis for the Omaha South community. These activities align with the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020 outcome four, “our communities are resilient and have access to what they need” and outcome five, “our local parks and recreational facilities meet the needs of our growing community.”

7. The society has a strong committee. In terms of meeting the criteria as a community lessee, it has sufficient funds to meet its liabilities and it is managed appropriately. The society has all the necessary insurance cover in place, including public liability and asset insurance.

8. As the society own its courts and associated improvements, it has an automatic right to re‑apply for a new lease at the end of its occupancy term. The standard recommended term of lease is 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years.

9. The ‘required use’ under the lease agreement will be for activities consistent with outdoor sports and recreation.

10. Manuhiri Reserve, Pukemateko Reserve and Tuna Place Reserve are subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and are all classified as recreation reserves under the Act. Currently there isn’t an operative reserve management plan for the reserves. The proposed new lease was therefore publicly notified. Council did not receive any submissions. All statutory requirements have now been satisfied in this regard.

11. This report recommends the local board grant a new community lease to Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated for land at Manuhiri Reserve, Pukemateko Reserve and Tuna Place Reserve, Omaha South.

12. If the local board resolves to grant the lease, staff will work with the society to finalise the lease agreement.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) grant Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated, under section 54(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977, a new community lease for land comprising; 1211 square metres (more or less) located at Manuhiri Reserve, 83 Taumata Road, Omaha South, legally described as Lot 815 Deposited Plan 206443, 1205 square metres (more or less) located at Pukemateko Reserve, 179 Mangatawhiri Road, Omaha South, legally described as Lot 828 Deposited Plan 206443 and 1133 square metres (more or less) located at Tuna Place Reserve, Tuna Place, Omaha South, legally described as Lot 873 Deposited Plan 349224 (Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – 10 years, commencing 15 March 2023, with one 10 year right of renewal

ii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded

iii) a community outcomes plan will be appended as a schedule to the lease agreement

b) approve the Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated community outcomes plan (Attachment B to the agenda report)

c) note that all other terms and conditions will be in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Horopaki

Context

13. Local boards have the allocated authority relating to local recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

14. The Rodney Local Board approved the Community Facilities: Community Leases Work Programme 2021/2022 at its local board business meeting of 16 June 2021 (resolution RD/2021/265).

15. The progression of a new lease to Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated for land at Manuhiri, Pukemateko and Tuna Place Reserves, respectively, was listed on the approved work programme as item number 1065. This report recommends the grant of a new lease as approved on the work programme.

Land, tennis courts, associated improvements and lease

16. Manuhiri, Pukemateko and Tuna Place Reserves are located within Omaha South. Information on the subject land is detailed in the table below:

Reserve name and address	Legal description	Ownership	Classification under the Reserves Act 1977
Manuhiri Reserve, 83 Taumata Road	Lot 815 Deposited Plan 206443	Fee simple by Auckland Council	Recreation reserve
Pukemateko Reserve, 179 Mangatawhiri Road	Lot 828 Deposited Plan 206443	Fee simple by Auckland Council	Recreation reserve
Tuna Place Reserve, Tuna Place	Lot 873 Deposited Plan 349224	Fee simple by Auckland Council	Recreation reserve

17. The society’s improvements are detailed in the table below:

Reserve	Improvements
Manuhiri	Courts, fencing and lighting
Pukemateko	Courts, fencing and lighting
Tuna Place	Courts and fencing

18. The existing lease agreement entered into with the former Rodney District Council commenced 1 October 2002 and expired 30 September 2021. The agreement is currently holding over on a month-to-month basis on existing terms and conditions.

19. In 2022, the society formally applied to council for a new lease term. Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 informs staff recommendations, including standard terms and conditions. For groups that own their improvements, council staff recommend an initial term of 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years.

Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated

20. On 11 May 2002, the society was duly incorporated under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908.

21. The society has applied for a new community lease for its area occupied at the three subject reserves at Omaha South. The society has a strong and active committee who are passionate about maintaining its improvements for use by its members.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

22. Under the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, groups that own their improvements have an automatic right to re‑apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. The society have exercised this right by applying for a new lease.

23. As the underlying land is classified as recreation reserve and subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977, public notification was required. Engagement with mana whenua has also been undertaken in accordance with section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 which over-arches the Reserves Act 1977. These statutory requirements have been satisfied and are detailed in paragraphs 27 and 28.

Assessment of the lease application

24. The society submitted a comprehensive application supporting its request for a new lease and is able to demonstrate its ability to manage and maintain its improvements. A site visit has been undertaken and the improvements were found to be well maintained.

25. Staff recommend that the local board grant the society a new lease for a term of 10 years commencing from 15 March 2023 with one 10 year right of renewal.

Public notification

26. The underlying land at the three reserves is subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and classified as recreation. There isn’t a current operative reserve management plan for the reserves in which the lease is contemplated and in conformity. As such, the council was required to publicly notify the proposed new lease to the society.

27. In accordance with section 54(2) of the Act, Auckland Council undertook public notification of the proposed new community lease to the society for land at the three reserves. The public notification process is governed by section 119 of the Act. Additionally, in accordance with section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 which over-arches the Reserves Act, Auckland Council engaged with mana whenua identified as having an interest in land in the Rodney Local Board area about the proposal. Feedback from mana whenua is detailed in paragraph 38.

28. To meet the statutory requirements, public notices were placed in the Mahurangi Matters on 4 July 2022 and the Rodney Times on 7 July 2022. The proposal was also advertised on the Auckland Council website. Submitters were allowed one calendar month to make submissions or objections to the proposal. Council staff did not receive any submissions during this period.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29. To improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts, the council advocates that the lessee:

· use sustainable waste, energy and water efficiency systems

· use eco labelled products and services

· seek opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from lease-related activities

· include any other outcomes that will improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts.

30. All measures taken are aimed at meeting council’s climate goals, as set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, which are:

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and

· to prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change.

31. Climate change does have potential to impact the lease, as portions of the leased area sit adjacent to a coastal inundation zone and a flood-sensitive zone (Attachment C to the agenda report). The table below contains details:

Reserve name and address	Coastal inundation	Flood-sensitive zone	Mitigations
Manuhiri Reserve, 83 Taumata Road	This portion of the lease area sits adjacent to an area identified as a 100-year coastal inundation with one metre sea level rise.	This portion of the lease area sits within a flood plain and flood prone area.	The underlying land has a sand base which drains well. The lease area is for outdoor recreational purposes only and may be cleaned after a flooding event.
Pukemateko Reserve, 179 Mangatawhiri Road	This portion of the lease area does not sit within an area identified as a 100-year coastal inundation with one metre sea level rise.	Approximately 30 percent of this portion of the lease area sits within a flood plain and flood prone area.	The underlying land has a sand base which drains well. The lease area is for outdoor recreational purposes only and may be cleaned after a flooding event
Tuna Place Reserve, Tuna Place	This portion of the lease area does not sit within an area identified as a 100-year coastal inundation with one metre sea level rise.	This portion of the lease area sits within a flood plain and flood prone area.	The underlying land has a sand base which drains well. The lease area is for outdoor recreational purposes only and may be cleaned after a flooding event.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. Council staff from within the Customer and Community Services Directorate have been consulted on the proposed new lease. The table below contains detailed feedback:

Relevant team	Feedback
Sport and Recreation Lead, Parks and Community Facilities	“I support the new lease to Omaha Beach Residents Society and happy with the targets regarding court maintenance.”
Facilities Coordinator, Area Operations, Parks and Community Facilities	“I have no issues with this.”
Parks and Places Specialist, Parks and Community Facilities	“No concerns from my perspective.”
Strategic Broker, Connected Communities	“No concerns from me either.”

33. The proposed new lease has no identified impact on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

34. The recommendations in this report support the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020 outcome four “our communities are resilient and have access to what they need” and outcome five “our local parks and recreational facilities meet the needs of our growing community.”

35. In May 2022, leasing staff provided the local board with a memorandum by way of email about the society’s application for a new community lease. The local board did not raise any specific concerns to the proposal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

36. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi which are outlined in council’s key strategic planning documents; the Auckland Plan, the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, and local board plans.

37. For the purposes of seeking feedback from mana whenua groups identified as having an interest in land in the local board geographical area, staff prepared a power point document containing detail on the proposed new lease.

38. On 27 May 2022, staff emailed the document to key representatives for mana whenua as follows; Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Maru, Ngati Pāoa, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngātiwai, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Te Patu Kirikiri and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua.

39. The table below contains feedback received:

Iwi group

Feedback

Te Ākitai Waiohua

“Further to the above, I have no feedback to offer, other than to say that I'll defer to those Iwi Mana Whenua, with a more focused interest in the respective LB areas.”

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. The cost involved in the public notification process was in the amount of $1019.75 which was borne by the Parks and Community Facilities Department.

41. There is no ongoing cost to council associated with the grant of a new lease. The society will continue to take responsibility for all operational and renewal costs involved with its courts and other improvements located on the three subject reserves.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

42. Should the local board resolve not to grant the society a new community lease, this will negatively impact the ability of the society to undertake all current and future activities in terms of the provision of courts. This would have an adverse impact on the achievement of the respective local board plan outcome.

43. A new lease would afford the society security of tenure, enabling it to attend to the scheduled maintenance of the courts and improvements. Should the society vacate its courts, there would be a risk associated with lack of maintenance. In this scenario, council would be liable for the courts and other improvements regardless of whether budget is allocated to or identified for renewals. Similarly, the required court renewals do not appear in the annual work programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

44. If the local board resolves to grant the proposed new community lease, staff will work with the society to finalise the lease agreement in accordance with the local board decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	GIS aerial view showing the lease area to Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated at Omaha South	17
b ⇩	Omaha Beach Residents Society Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan	21
c ⇩	GIS aerial view from Auckland Council's Hazard Viewer	23

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Karen Walby - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Parks and Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 March 2023

Grant a community lease to The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated for land at Murray Jones Reserve, 27 Newton Road, Riverhead

File No.: CP2023/01475

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a community lease to The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated (trading as Scouts Aotearoa) as the parent body for Riverhead Scout Group for land at Murray Jones Reserve, 27 Newton Road, Riverhead, on which Riverhead Scout Group’s boat/kayak storage shed is located.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. For decades, the Riverhead Scout Group has occupied land at Murray Jones Reserve on which it’s boat/kayak storage shed is located. To date, Riverhead Scout Group has not had a formal occupancy agreement with council for the land.

3. The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated (the association) is the parent body for all New Zealand scout groups. As such, Riverhead Scout Group, under the parent body of The Scout Association of New Zealand, has formally applied to council for a community lease.

4. Riverhead Scout Group has a strong committee; it has sufficient funds to meet its liabilities and it is managed appropriately. The association as parent body for Riverhead Scout Group meets the criteria as a community lessee. The association carries public liability insurance cover for all New Zealand scout groups.

5. Riverhead Scout Group provides the facilities that directly support its water-based activities at Murray Jones Reserve. These activities align with the local board plan 2020 outcome four “our communities are resilient and have access to what they need” and outcome five “our local parks and recreational facilities meet the needs of our growing community.”

6. In accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, as Riverhead Scout Group own its boat/kayak storage shed, the standard recommended term of lease is 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years. The ‘required use’ under the lease agreement will be for scouting activities and associated purposes.

7. The progression of the community lease was originally listed on Community Facilities, Community Leases Work Programme 2017/2018 as approved by the local board at its business meeting of 15 June 2017 (Resolution number RD/2017/102). As the underlying reserve land was an unclassified recreation reserve, the leasing project was deferred until the land was formally classified. In late 2019, council staff classified the land as a component of the work involved to prepare the draft Rodney Local Board Local Parks Management Plan.

8. Murray Jones Reserve is subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977 and is classified as recreation reserve under the Act. The operative Murray Jones Reserve Management Plan contemplates the association’s activities. As such, council staff was not required to publicly notify the proposed new lease.

9. This report recommends the local board grant The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated (trading as Scouts Aotearoa) as parent body for the Riverhead Scout Group a community lease for the footprint of land occupied by its boat/kayak storage shed at Murray Jones Reserve, Riverhead.

10. If the local board resolves to grant the lease, staff will work with the association to finalise the lease agreement.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) grant The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated (Trading as Scouts Aotearoa) as parent body for Riverhead Scout Group, under section 54(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977, a community lease for 74 square metres (more or less) of reserve land at Murray Jones Reserve, 27 Newton Road, Riverhead, legally described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 196361 (Attachment A to the agenda report), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – 10 years, commencing 15 March 2023, with one 10 year right of renewal

ii) rent – $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded

iii) a community outcomes plan will be appended as a schedule to the lease agreement

b) approve The Scout Association Incorporated community outcomes plan (Attachment B to the agenda report)

c) note that all other terms and conditions will be in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Horopaki

Context

11. Local boards have the allocated authority relating to local recreation, sport and community facilities, including community leasing matters.

12. The progression of the community lease was originally listed as item number 1413 on the Community Facilities, Community Leases Work Programme 2017/2018 as approved by the local board at its business meeting of 15 June 2017 (Resolution number RD/2017/102).

Land, operative Murray Jones Reserve Management Plan, boat/kayak storage shed and draft Rodney Local Board Parks Management Plan

Land

13. Murray Jones Reserve comprises three land parcels. The land parcel on which Riverhead Scout Group’s boat/kayak storage shed is located is legally described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 196361 and is subject to the requirements of the Reserves Act 1977. In late 2019, council staff formally classified Lot 2 Deposited Plan 196361 as recreation reserve under the Act.

14. The work to formally classify land at Murray Jones Reserve validated the operative reserve management plan and legally supports the grant of a community lease for the associations’ activities.

15. Plan change 22 to the Auckland Unitary Plan has scheduled a total of 30 sites and places of significance to mana whenua across Tāmaki Makaurau (Auckland). Site 94 covers Murray Jones Reserve and the adjacent Riverhead Historic Mill Esplanade Reserve, Riverhead, which is an historic Māori settlement (kāinga) known as Taurangatira. A founding ancestor of Te Kawerau ā Maki lived in this area.

16. With respect to Plan change 22, council staff has liaised with key representatives for Riverhead Scout Group about Māori cultural heritage and values associated with this site of significance, including restricting certain activities such as new buildings, structures and alterations, etc.

Operative Murray Jones Reserve Management Plan considerations

17. The operative reserve management plan for Murray Jones Reserve was adopted by the former Rodney District Council in October 2008. Under the ‘landscape modification’ section of the plan the boat/kayak storage shed is recorded as being located on the reserve land. Under the ‘future development’ section and in terms of a proposed new scout den, the plan cited the possibility that the Riverhead Scout Group may relocate from Riverhead War Memorial Park to Murray Jones Reserve. Thus, the plan incorporated a proposal for the development of a new scout den and the subsequent removal of the boat/kayak shed.

18. During 2014 and 2015, key committee members of the Riverhead Scout Group worked diligently to fundraise for the proposed development of a new scout den. While construction drawings were commissioned, Riverhead Scout Group was unable to raise sufficient funds to progress its proposal at Murray Jones Reserve. As a consequence, Riverhead Scout Group consolidated its assets and made improvements to its original scout den on Riverhead War Memorial Park.

19. In 2016, the Riverhead Scout Group formally applied to council for a community lease for the land on which it’s boat/kayak storage shed is located. During the necessary research into the land status, staff discovered that the underlying reserve land hadn’t been legally classified as recreation reserve. As such, the leasing project was deferred until the land was classified.

Boat/kayak storage shed

20. In early 2020 Riverhead Scout Group updated its application to council for a community lease. On 11 March 2020, council staff undertook a site visit and met with a key committee member for Riverhead Scout Group at which time the boat/kayak storage shed was found to be in a serviceable condition commensurate with its age. During the visit, council staff discussed Riverhead Scout Group’s activities, pi mahi (working bee/s), ongoing maintenance and targets for a community outcomes plan.

Draft Rodney Local Parks Management Plan

21. The draft Rodney Local Parks Management Plan includes the following under Leases and Licences: Contemplated leases and licences within existing footprints for organised recreation and education activities and facilities, e.g., youth activities and development.

The Scout Association of New Zealand

22. The Scout Association of New Zealand is incorporated under a private act – The Scout Association of New Zealand Act 1956. The Scout Association of New Zealand was registered as an incorporated society on 25 July 1966. The aims and objectives of the Association include:

i) encourage the physical, mental, emotional, social and spiritual development of young people so that they may take a constructive place in society.

ii) the method of achieving the aim of the association is by providing an enjoyable and attractive scheme of progressive training based on the Scout Law and Promise and guided by adult leadership.

23. The Scout Association of New Zealand was registered as a charitable entity under the Charities Act 2005 on 4 July 2007.

24. The Scout Association of New Zealand (as parent body for all New Zealand scout groups) enters into community leases with council for the land on which the respective scout group owns its structures and associated improvements.

Riverhead Scout Group

25. Riverhead Scout Group was established in 1951 and facilitates all the kea, cub, scout and venturer divisions, catering for its youth ranging in age from seven and a half years to 18 years.

26. Riverhead Scout Group with its dedicated volunteers operates under the rules and constitution of the association and is charged with providing youth programmes within the Riverhead community. With a current youth membership of 95, Riverhead Scout Group draw a very significant percentage of the local area youth (the local school has a roll of 470 pupils).

27. Riverhead Scout Group has provided financial accounts which indicate that its funds are sufficient to meet its liabilities and are being managed appropriately. Collectively, Riverhead Scout Group and the association have all necessary insurance cover, including asset and public liability insurance, in place.

28. Council staff has negotiated and agreed a community outcomes plan with Riverhead Scout Group which, if approved by the Rodney Local Board will be appended as a schedule to the new community lease.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

29. Under the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, the standard term of tenure for groups that own their improvements is an initial term of 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years.

30. The subject land at Murray Jones Reserve is subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and classified as recreation. The operative reserve management plan for Murray Jones Reserve adopted by the former Rodney District Council in October 2008 cites the reserve as being an important reserve within the Riverhead area. Additionally, that the land/water interface provides recreational opportunities including canoeing and kayaking. As the associations’ activities are contemplated in the plan, council staff was not required to publicly notify the proposed new lease.

31. In accordance with section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 which over-arches the Reserves Act, Auckland Council engaged with mana whenua identified as having an interest in land in the Rodney Local Board area about the proposal. Feedback from mana whenua is detailed in paragraph 45 of the agenda report.

Assessment of the lease application

32. Riverhead Scout Group (in conjunction with the association) has submitted a comprehensive application supporting its request for a new community lease and is able to demonstrate its ability to manage and maintain its improvements. A site visit has been undertaken and the boat/kayak shed was found to be maintained and its condition commensurate with its age.

33. Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 informs staff recommendations, including standard terms and conditions. For groups that own their improvements, council staff recommend an initial term of 10 years with one right of renewal for 10 years.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

34. To improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts, the council advocates that the lessee:

· use sustainable waste, energy and water efficiency systems

· use eco labelled products and services

· seek opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from lease-related activities

· include any other outcomes that will improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts.

35. All measures taken are aimed at meeting council’s climate goals, as set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, which are:

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and

· to prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change.

36. Riverhead Scout Group provides education to and action with its scout troop, incorporating sessions on sustainability, conservation, climate change and ocean health.

37. Climate change does have potential to impact the lease, as the leased area sits adjacent to a coastal inundation zone and within a flood-sensitive zone (Attachment C to the agenda report). The lease area is for storage for gear used for water-related activities only and may be cleaned after a flooding event.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38. Council staff from within the Customer and Community Services Directorate have been consulted on the proposed new lease. The table below contains detailed feedback:

Relevant team	Feedback
Sport and Recreation Lead, Parks and Community Facilities	“Based on the background you have provided, the sport and rec team are very supportive of the Scout Group securing a lease on this site that will allow the group to continue to be physically active. No concerns at this stage from me.”
Facilities Manager, Area Operations, Parks and Community Facilities	“Nothing to add from me.”
Parks and Places Specialist, Parks and Community Facilities	“We are comfortable with the proposed lease from a specialist operations perspective.”
Strategic Broker, Connected Communities	“Happy with this.”
Service and Asset Planner, Service Investment and Programming	“We have reviewed this and consider that our team would be supportive of the lease for the following reasons; Murray Jones Reserve is classified as recreation reserve, and the ongoing use of the boat/kayak storage shed for scouting activities is in keeping with the outcomes envisaged in a recreation reserve under section 17(1) of the Reserves Act 1977; “…for the purpose of providing areas for the recreation and sporting activities and the physical welfare and enjoyment of the public.” The use of the storage shed for scouting activities would seem to be envisaged under the proposed draft Rodney Local Parks Management Plan that lists ‘informal recreation’ as a value associated with Murray Jones Reserve. The storage shed is existing and does not require any additions and alterations under the proposal, therefore the proposal would seem to comply with Plan Change 22. It will also enable the local community to enhance their outdoor recreational experiences.”

39. The proposed new lease has no identified impact on other parts of the council group. The views of council-controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of this report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

40. The recommendations in this report support the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020 outcome four “our communities are resilient and have access to what they need” and outcome five “our local parks and recreational facilities meet the needs of our growing community.” The front cover of the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020 features an image of the boat/kayak storage shed on Murray Jones Reserve (Attachment D to the agenda report).

41. At its workshop of 4 July 2016, leasing staff presented the Rodney Local Board Parks Culture and Community Development Committee with a memorandum about the association’s application for a community lease. The committee did not raise any specific concerns about the proposal at that time.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

42. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi which are outlined in council’s key strategic planning documents; the Auckland Plan, the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, and local board plans.

43. For the purposes of seeking feedback from mana whenua groups identified as having an interest in land in the local board geographical area, staff prepared a power point document containing information on the proposed new lease, including detailed information on Plan change 22 to the Auckland Unitary Plan with respect to site 94, Murray Jones Reserve.

44. Staff were due to present on the proposed new lease to the North-West Mana Whenua Forum scheduled for 1 April 2020. Unfortunately, the forum was cancelled due to the initial COVID-19 lockdown.

45. On 2 April 2020, staff emailed the document to key representatives for mana whenua as follows; Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Maru, Ngati Pāoa, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngātiwai, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whatua Ōrākei, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Te Patu Kirikiri and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua.

46. Feedback was received from the kaitiaki for Ngāi Tai - Taiaomaurikura advising that the iwi did not require any engagement and had no objection to the proposal; and that, for the most part, the proposal is not within its operational rohe and anticipated that other local iwi may comment further. Staff did not receive any further feedback on the matter.

47. Riverhead Scout Group is incorporating more te reo Māori and Māori culture into its sessions e.g., a Matariki session is held annually at the boat shed and on Murray Jones Reserve for 30 of its youngest scouts with storytelling, games, star gazing and soup making.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

48. There is no direct cost to council associated with the grant of a new lease. The Riverhead Scout Group will continue to take responsibility for all operational and renewal costs involved with its boat/kayak storage shed located on Murray Jones Reserve.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

49. Should the local board resolve not to grant the association a new community lease, this will negatively impact the ability of Riverhead Scout Group to undertake all current and future activities. This would have an adverse impact on the achievement of the respective local board plan outcome.

50. A new lease would afford security of tenure for the association and Riverhead Scout Group collectively, enabling Riverhead Scout Group to attend to the scheduled maintenance of the boat/kayak storage shed. Should the Riverhead Scout Group vacate its shed, there would be a risk associated with lack of maintenance. In this scenario, council would be liable for the boat/kayak storage shed regardless of whether budget is allocated to or identified for renewals. Similarly, any required shed renewal does not appear in the annual work programme.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

51. If the local board resolves to the grant the proposed community lease, staff will work with the association to finalise the lease agreement in accordance with the local board decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	GIS aerial view showing lease area to The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated	35
b ⇩	The Scout Association of New Zealand Incorporated Community Outcomes Plan	37
c ⇩	GIS aerial view from Auckland Council's Hazard Viewer	39
d ⇩	Image from the front cover of the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020	41

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Karen Walby - Community Lease Advisor

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Parks and Community Facilities

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

PDF Creator

Rodney Local Board

15 March 2023

Approval for five new road names at 22 Lysnar Road, Stage 5 Milldale

File No.: CP2023/02422

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve names for five new public roads created by way of subdivision undertaken by Fulton Hogan Land Development at 22 Lysnar Road, Stage 5, Milldale.

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, Fulton Hogan Land Development Limited agent Warren Frogley of Brandmad 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 five new roads at Stage 5 Milldale are:

Preferred	Alternative (options for all five roads)
Milldale Drive – Road 1	Flax Mill Road
MacGregor Lane – Road 2	Enoch Drive
Hicks Road – Road 3	Elon Mews
Pūrua Street – Road 4	Enos Street
Mātāhae Cresent – Road 5	Craddock Drive

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve the following names for the five new public roads created by way of subdivision undertaken by Fulton Hogan Land Development at 22 Lysnar Road, Stage 5, Milldale, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60395597, SUB60395598 and road naming reference RDN90106041).

i) Milldale Road (Road 1)

ii) MacGregor Lane (Road 2)

iii) Hicks Road (Road 3)

iv) Pūrua Street (Road 4)

v) Mātāhae Cresent (Road 5)

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference number BUN60395597 (SUB60395598) was issued on 30 June 2022 for the creation of 122 residential lots and five public roads.

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 (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

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 Maori 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.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Milldale Drive (applicant’s preference Road 1)	Name has been chosen for ease of navigation to the central hub of the development.
MacGregor Lane (applicant’s preference Road 2)	Surname of early European landowners of a large portion of Stage 5.
Hicks Road (applicant’s preference Road 3)	Surname of early European landowner and developer of part of Stage 5.
Pūrua Street (applicant’s preference Road 4)	Translating to ‘junction of streams and rivers’ – this road is on the north side of the split with Orewa River and Waterloo Creek
Mātāhae Cresent (applicant’s preference Road 5)	Translating to ‘divergent stream from the main channel of a river’ - this road is on the south side of the split with Orewa River and Waterloo Creek
Flax Mill Road (alternative)	A flax mill was operated within the Orewa / Waterloo wetlands area.
Enoch Drive (alternative)	Enoch Bond was the founder of the Bond Brothers General Store in the Wade (1875) for his sons.
Elon Mews (alternative)	The eldest son of Enoch Bond, of the Bond Brothers General Store.
Enos Street (alternative)	The fourth son of Enoch Bond.
Craddock Drive (alternative)	Enoch’s brother who lived in the Bond family home and provided services in the family general store.

11. 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.

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

13. Road Type: ‘Drive’, ‘Lane’, ‘Mews’, ‘Road’, ‘Street’ and ‘Crescent’ are acceptable road types for the new roads suiting their form and layout.

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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.

19. On 2 February 2023 mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of Fulton Hogan Land Development, 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:

· Ngāti WaiTe Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

· Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei

· Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Pāoa Iwi Trust

· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board

· Ngāti Maru

§ Ngāti Whanaunga

· Ngāti Manuhiri

§ Ngāti Wai.

19. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days), one response had been received from Ngāti Manuhiri Charitable Trust who did not support some of the names as they believed they did not accord to the road naming guidelines.

20. The developer’s agent has since followed up with Ngāti Manuhiri Charitable Trust who have suggested substitute Te Reo names and which are now presented in this report.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

22. Fulton Hogan Land Development 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

23. 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

24. 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 ⇩	Milldale Stage 5 Scheme Plan March 2023	49
b ⇩	Milldale Stage 5 Locality Plan March 2023	51

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 March 2023

Approval for three new road names at 332 Wainui Road, Millwater

File No.: CP2023/02426

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the name of one new public road and two new private roads being commonly owned access lots created by way of subdivision development undertaken by WHF (Millwater Developments) at 332 Wainui Road, Millwater.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. On behalf of the developer and applicant, WFH (Millwater Developments) agent Warren Frogley of Brandmad has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

5. The proposed names for the one new public road and two new private roads at 332 Wainui Road are:

Preferred name	Alternatives
Pūruatanga Road – Road 1	Collett Place
Reid Court – Road 2	Pyramid Place
Hayley Court – Road 3	Gertrude Place

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) approve the following names for one new public road and two new private roads created by way of subdivision undertaken by WHF (Millwater Developments) at 332 Wainui road, Millwater, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (resource consent references BUN60359407 and SUB60359409 and road naming reference RDN90106034).

i) Pūruatanga Road (Road 1)

ii) Reid Court (Road 2)

iii) Hayley Court (Road 3)

Horopaki

Context

6. Resource consent reference number BUN60359407 was issued on 11 January 2021 for the creation of thirty residential lots, one public road, three commonly owned access lots (COALs) and a pedestrian accessway.

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 public road requires a name and two new COALs (Roads 2 and 3) as 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.

Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Pūruatanga Road (applicant’s preference Road 1)	Translating to ‘junction of the streams’. This road is just before the split between Orewa River and Waterloo Creek
Reid Court (applicant’s preference Road 2)	Surname of original European landowner, ‘Don Reid’
Hayley Court (applicant’s preference Road 3)	Name of daughter of the original European landowner
Collett Place (alternative)	Surname of early European landowner.
Pyramid Place (alternative)	North-eastern section of original farm featured a ‘pyramid’ shaped house.
Gertrude Place (alternative)	Affectionate name of abandoned antique steel-wheeled tractor previously used on the land.

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: ‘Road, ‘Court’ and ‘Place’ are acceptable road types for the new private and public roads, suiting their form and layout.

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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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.

16. On 2 February 2023 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 Whātua o Kaipara

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei

· Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Pāoa Iwi Trust

· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board

· Ngāti Maru

· Ngāti Whanaunga

· Ngāti Manuhiri

· Ngāti Wai.

17. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days), one response had been received from Ngāti Manuhiri Charitable Trust who did not support the names as they believed they did not accord to the road naming guidelines. No alternate names were put forward and no other responses were received.

18. The developer’s agent has since followed up with Ngāti Manuhiri Charitable Trust who have suggested a Te Reo name which has now been proposed as the preferred name for Road 1.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

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

18. WHF (Millwater Developments) 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

19. 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

20. Approved road names are notified to Land Information New Zealand (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 ⇩	332 Wainui Road Scheme Plan March 2023	59
b ⇩	332 Wainui Road Locality Plan March 2023	61

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Bruce Angove – Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

Trevor Cullen - Team Leader Subdivision

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 March 2023

Auckland Transport update on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate – March 2023

File No.: CP2023/02455

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To update the local board on the programme being delivered by Auckland Transport using the funding from the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate was introduced by Auckland Council in 2018 after extensive community consultation. An annual rate of $150 is collected from all Rodney ratepayers by Auckland Council, and the programme is delivered by Auckland Transport on behalf of the Rodney Local Board.

3. The Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate is ring-fenced for transport projects in the Rodney Local Board area that are not included in the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031. It was established on the basis that the fund is to support:

· new bus stops and bus services

· new community transport hub facilities

· new footpaths.

4. The $150 per annum rateable property charge is projected to raise $46 million over 10 years. As of the 21 September 2022, $43,244,355 has been approved for funding through resolutions across the Rodney Local Board area for the projects within the targeted rate’s scope.

5. The targeted rate has been allocated across all four subdivisions in the Rodney Local Board area: Wellsford, Warkworth, Kumeū and Dairy Flat with total expenditure to date totalling $16,651,650.

6. The Warkworth Community Transport Hub has now been completed and is being used by the 998 bus service and will be ready for full operation as soon as Te Honohono ki Tai and Ara Te Hono (Puhoi to Warkworth motorway extension) are open.

7. Funds have been approved for the investigation, design and construction of the Huapai Community Transport Hub.

8. The local board agreed that new on-demand and fixed-route shuttle services for Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit should be funded through the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate at their 21 September 2022 business meeting.

9. The Rodney Local Board approved funding to deliver 35 footpath projects in total; four have been completed. Table B in Attachment A of the agenda report outlines the local board resolutions from 2020-2022 for the footpath projects being delivered by Auckland Transport.

10. The local board deferred five of the footpath projects in Waimauku, Riverhead and Warkworth at the 21 September 2022 business meeting and the remaining 26 projects are progressing through the investigation and design phases into construction.

11. Fifteen of the footpath projects will commence construction in this financial year before 30 June 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) note the status and progress of the delivery of the projects being funded under the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate.

Horopaki

Context

12. In May 2018, the local board recommended (resolution number RD/2018/61) that the Governing Body approve a targeted rate to accelerate investment in transport in the Rodney Local Board area. The recommendation was accepted, and the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate (RLBTTR) is currently scheduled to run for 10 years (2018 – 2028).

13. The local board is the decision-maker regarding funds raised through the rate. Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport (AT) provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

14. The RLBTTR is ring-fenced for transport projects in the Rodney Local Board area that are not included in the Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-2031. It was established on the basis that the fund is to support:

· new bus stops and bus services

· new park-and-ride community hub facilities

· new footpaths.

15. The targeted rate must be spent on these items and any material changes to spending priorities may require further public consultation.

16. The rate was established on the principle that each subdivision within the Rodney Local Board area receives the revenue collected within their subdivision to be used for projects delivered within their area.

17. As the projects develop and firmer cost estimates are prepared, changes will be required to the projects proposed within each subdivision to ensure proportionality is maintained. The Rodney Local Board monitors the performance of the projects and determines whether to re-prioritise its expenditure based on the stated purposes of the funds raised.

1. The budget approvals for the projects across the Rodney Local Board area are all based on cost estimates. As the transport projects are delivered and actual costs are incurred, changes will be required to the budget allocation and to the available funds for projects. Rodney Local Board and Auckland Transport will monitor the reconciliation of these budgets and re-prioritise allocations across the programme.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

2. Allocations: The table below shows the total amount to be allocated by subdivision based on the number of separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit (SUIP) as at 1 July 2018 until the end of the RLBTTR to fund additional transport investment in the Rodney Local Board Area.

Targeted rate total amount allocated based on SUIPs as at July 2018
	Wellsford	Warkworth	Kumeū	Dairy Flat	Total
No of SUIPs as on 1 July 2018	3,185	12,673	12,280	2,660	30,798
Targeted rate in total for 10 years based on 1 July 2018 # of SUIPs	$4,777,500	$19,009,500	$18,420,000	$3,990,000	$46,197,000

20. Approvals: The following table outlines the RLBTTR full budget approvals as at 21 September 2022. The projects approved for funding through resolutions across the Rodney Local Board area are within the targeted rate’s scope of footpaths, community transport hubs, bus services and bus stops.

Full budget allocations as at 21 September 2022
Total budget allocation for programme	$46,197,000
Programme pipeline
Footpaths programme		$24,098,000 (Footpath budget allocation before 21 September 2022 business meeting) Less $2,274,000 for footpath projects deferred in September 2022 Total $21,824,000	Includes: i. All tranches of approved footpaths ii. Deferral of the following footpath projects with a reduction in the budget allocation of $2,274,000: · Waimauku Station Road, Waimauku · Newton Road, Riverhead · Cambridge Road and Queens Street, Riverhead · Duke Street, Riverhead · Falls Road, Warkworth.
Community Transport Hub programme		$10,500,000	Includes approved budget of $6.5 million for Huapai CTH
Bus services		$10,059,539	Includes: i. Final costs for buses 126, 128 and 995. NB: bus services now funded by Auckland Transport and the Climate Action Targeted Rate Programme ii. approved budget of $2,550,000 for the on-demand and fixed-route shuttle service for Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit
Bus stops		$860,816
Total budget allocation		$43,244,355
Remaining funds of RLBTTR budget		$2,952,645-
Totals	$46,197,000	$46,197,000

21. Expenditure: The following table details the total actual expenditure to 31 January 2023 by subdivision across the targeted rate’s scope of footpaths, community transport hubs, bus services and bus stops.

Total actual expenditure to 31 January 2023 by subdivision (from July 2018)
	Wellsford	Warkworth	Kumeū	Dairy Flat	Total
Footpaths	$396,750	$2,120,935	$501,033	$738,308	$3,757,026
Community Transport Hubs	$0	$4,170,289	$353,980	$0	$4,524,269
Bus services	$682,467	$682,489	$5,240,871	$903,712	$7,509,539
Bus stops	$43,041	$0	$731,693	$86,082	$860,816
Total expenditure to date by subdivision	$1,122,258	$6,973,713	$6,827,577	$1,728,102	$16,651,650

Community Transport Hub Projects

22. The local board selected Warkworth and Huapai for community transport hubs.

23. The local board approved (resolution number RD/2020/75) the construction of the Warkworth Community Transport Hub. The Warkworth Community Transport Hub is operational following the local board opening on 30 June 2022.

24. In July 2022 the local board approved $6.5 million for the investigation, design and construction of the Huapai Community Transport Hub (resolution number RD/2022/4).

25. The table below outlines the progress for the Huapai Community Transport Hub.

Huapai Community Transport Hub (Kumeū Subdivision)

Phase: Investigation and Design

Next Milestones:

· A separate report seeking approval for the proposed reclassification of a part of Huapai Domain from recreation reserve to local purpose (parking) reserve and support for public notification of the same will be presented at the 19 April business meeting by Auckland Council’s Property and Commercial Business in the Parks and Community Facilities Department.

· Present preliminary design and updated cost estimate to the local board in June 2023.

Bus Services and Bus Stops

26. Bus stop infrastructure was installed under the RLBTTR Programme to support the roll out of the new bus services, the 128, 126 and 998 introduced in 2019.

27. The local board agreed that new on-demand and fixed-route shuttle services for Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit should be funded through the RLBTTR at the 21 September 2022 business meeting.

28. The table below outlines the progress for the new on-demand and fixed-route shuttle services for Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit.

New on-demand and fixed-route shuttle services for Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit (Warkworth Subdivision)

Phase: Planning and procurement

Next Milestones:

· Release Requests For Proposals (RFP) for the Warkworth, Leigh and Sandspit service.

· Consultation and engagement: The plans for the new bus service will be accompanied by a public and operator Consultation and Engagement plan to;

a) Better understand the needs to create a service fit for purpose.

b) Ensure the public is happy with the suggested zone for the Warkworth on- demand service.

c) Ensure the public is happy with the timetables for the Leigh and Sandspit services.

d) Gather any further feedback on these services, for example suggestions on where the Leigh and Sandspit services may stop en-route.

· Warkworth on demand bus services are expected to be operating from the second half of 2023.

Footpath Projects

29. The Rodney Local Board has approved funding to deliver 35 footpath projects in total; four have been completed. Funding for the footpath projects was approved in three tranches: Tranche 1 in 2020, Tranche 2 in 2021 and Tranche 3 in 2022.

30. The local board approved the deferral of five of the footpath projects in Waimauku, Riverhead and Warkworth at the 21 September 2022 business meeting. Auckland Transport’s investigation and design phases for these five footpath projects highlighted issues including:

· external factors requiring change to the scope of projects

· cost escalation

· technical and design issues e.g. road widening requirements

· private plan changes and developer plans requiring footpaths to be constructed by developers

· pedestrian safety

· existing stormwater issues.

31. The remaining 26 projects are progressing through the investigation and design phases into construction.

33. Construction on the footpath projects with Wharehine Construction Ltd as the main contractor started in February, with a duration of 18 months. The first project underway is on Dairy Flat Highway.

33. The tables in Attachments A to the agenda report outline: the physical works packages for the footpath programme covering Tranche 1 and 2 projects (Table A), the local board resolutions for the footpath projects being delivered by Auckland Transport (Table B) and the progress of footpath projects (Table C).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

34. The Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate supports the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan, the Rodney Local Board Plan 2020 and Auckland Council priorities regarding mitigating the effects of climate change and reducing the council’s carbon emissions. The RLBTTR funds projects that enable better access to active and public transport, namely footpaths, bus services, bus infrastructure and community transport hub facilities.

35. Auckland Transport strives to provide attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reduce the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network. These projects all support pedestrian and/or cyclist safety, therefore contributing to climate change actions.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. The appropriate council group inputs were sought by Auckland Transport in the formulation of this update report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

37. The Rodney Local Board is the decision-maker for funds collected through the RLBTTR. Auckland Council receives the rates payments, and Auckland Transport provides technical advice and administers the funds on behalf of the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

38. Receipt of this report has no impacts or opportunities for Māori. Any engagement with Māori, or consideration of impacts and opportunities, will be carried out on an individual project basis.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. The Dairy Flat subdivision has $620,000 budget remaining for allocation.

40. The Kumeū subdivision has completed the allocation of funds to projects under the programme. There are therefore no further funds available for additional services or capital projects within this subdivision.

41. The Wellsford subdivision currently has a remaining allocation of $695,000. However, the approved budget for the Rodney St Footpath project is $3.4 million (this includes $3 million from RLBTTR and $400,000 from Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency). The design consultant for the project has signaled that the estimated construction cost may be higher than the provision in the $3.4 million budget. The project team is investigating the construction cost estimate and looking to mitigate this issue. Therefore, Auckland Transport would advise delaying any decisions on the allocation of the remaining budget.

42. The Warkworth subdivision has $1,640,000 budget remaining for allocation.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

43. Any increases in the cost estimate in any projects agreed by the local board will need formal approval via resolution at a business meeting.

44. The projects being developed under the RLBTTR Programme are subject to the usual project risks including scope changes and cost escalation associated with the development of detailed design plans. To mitigate this risk Auckland Transport will monitor, manage and report significant potential risks and seek approval from the local board on changes.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

45. Auckland Transport will continue working on the programme elements previously resolved by the Rodney Local Board.

46. The next quarterly report on the Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate will be June 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Rodney Local Board Transport Targeted Rate quarter report March 2023 Tables A to C	71

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jeremy Pellow – Programme Director, Rodney Transport Programme

Authorisers

Paul Thompson – Head of Community Engagement (North)

Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager

Rodney Local Board

15 March 2023

Local Government New Zealand – membership of Auckland Council

File No.: CP2023/02223

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide local boards with information that enables them to provide feedback to the Governing Body when it considers Auckland Council’s ongoing membership of Local Government New Zealand.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Mayor of Auckland leads the development of the annual plan. The mayor is promoting reduction of expenditure and in this context has asked for consideration of the council’s ongoing membership of Local Government New Zealand. This will be considered by the Governing Body at its meeting on 23 March 2023.

3. The council currently pays a subscription of approximately $400,000. In addition, there are costs associated with attending the annual conference and other activities. That expenditure could be applied to other council services.

4. Although Auckland Council is large enough to continue without using the resources and services provided by Local Government New Zealand, key questions are: should New Zealand have an association of local government? And, if so, should Auckland Council support this even though it might not need to use any of the resources or services provided by Local Government New Zealand?

5. This report provides information that will assist local boards to provide feedback to the Governing Body.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Rodney Local Board:

a) consider its feedback for the Governing Body’s consideration of Auckland Council’s ongoing membership of Local Government New Zealand.

Horopaki

Context

6. Local Government New Zealand is constituted as an incorporated society (New Zealand Local Government Association Inc). The members of the society are individual councils.

7. The objectives of Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ), under the constitution, are summarised as:

· promote the national interests of local government

· advocate on matters affecting the national interests of local government

· dialogue with government, parliamentarians and government agencies

· provide information to members

· research matters on behalf of member authorities

· provide advice and training opportunities

· hold conferences.

8. The components of LGNZ are:

· National Council, which is the governing body of LGNZ

· National Council Committees, to guide best practice

· Zones, which are geographical groups of councils and Auckland Council

· Sector Groups, which are groups of councils based on local government sectors (metropolitan, provincial, regional, rural).

9. The president and vice-president are elected at an annual general meeting (AGM) by ballot of member councils.

10. The National Council comprises the president and 17 members who are generally appointed by zones and sectors. Provision has been made in the LGNZ constitution for three members of Auckland Council on the National Council, one of which is reserved for a representative of Auckland Council’s 21 local boards. The National Council employs the chief executive.

11. Zones and sectors generally:

· make appointments to the National Council

· provide advice to the National Council

· disseminate information to members

· assist the National Council with dealing with issues

· receive updates from LGNZ on issues facing local government.

12. Auckland Council is not a member of a geographical zone of councils. It is its own Zone, recognising the 21 local boards in the Auckland Council model. The Auckland Council Zone meets four times per year and is attended by representatives of the 21 local boards and the Governing Body. The LGNZ President and Chief Executive, or their nominees, report to the Zone on the key issues facing the local government sector and being addressed by the National Council.

13. Auckland Council gets a number of benefits from its interactions with LGNZ. These benefits include keeping abreast of national issues affecting local government, influencing local government issues on the national agenda, providing sector leadership, and elected representatives being able to connect and network with their peers from across the country.

14. Auckland Council’s annual subscription for 2022/2023 is $350,352.26 excluding GST and covers an April to March financial year.

Composition of the National Council

15. The National Council comprises:

· the President

· the chair of Te Maruata

· one member elected by each of zones 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

· three members elected by the Metropolitan Sector Group (except Auckland Council)

· two members elected by the Regional Sector Group

· one member appointed by each of the provincial and rural groups

· the Mayor of Auckland

· one elected member appointed by the Auckland Council governing body

· one elected member appointed by the Auckland Council local boards.

16. Committees of the National Council include:

· Te Maruata

· the Young Elected Members’ committee

· the Community Board Executive Committee (an advisory committee)

· other committees set up by the National Council from time to time.

17. Although the members of LGNZ are the councils, the LGNZ constitution provides for one position on the National Council to be appointed by Auckland Council local boards.

18. A decision about the ongoing membership of LGNZ is made on behalf of Auckland Council as a whole and is made by the Governing Body.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

19. The Mayor of Auckland has a statutory role of leading the development of, among other things, the annual plan. Local boards will be aware that the mayor is proposing an annual plan that seeks to reduce council expenditure.

20. In this context, the mayor has asked that the ongoing membership of LGNZ is considered. The subscription together with related costs such as conference attendance is over $400K. That amount could be used for other council purposes.

21. Before the formation of Auckland Council, the eight legacy councils each paid their subscriptions to LGNZ. The subscription paid by Auckland Council is not the sum of those subscriptions, but a lower amount. As the subscription has already been discounted (by about $200K), seeking a further significant reduction is not considered to be an option.

22. LGNZ’s latest annual report (for 2021/22) shows that its gross surplus (revenue less direct costs) was just over $2 million and its net surplus before tax (after deducting operating expenses) was $341,007.

23. There are 78 councils in New Zealand with populations ranging in size from 600 (Chatham Islands) to 1.7 million (Auckland). The average population size per council is approximately 85,000 (about the size of an Auckland Council ward). After Auckland Council the next largest council in terms of population is Canterbury Regional Council with a population of 655,100. The largest city is Christchurch with a population of 389,130. Auckland Council is considerably larger than any other council in New Zealand.

24. LGNZ comprises and represents all councils in New Zealand. It is the body that central Government Ministers consult when seeking a view from the local government sector.

25. LGNZ provides resources such as policy advice, elected member development and conferences that are available to the whole sector.

26. Auckland Council, on the other hand, is large enough to provide policy advice and elected member development without calling on LGNZ services; although in the past there has been a collaboration between LGNZ and Auckland Council at a staff level and on National Council and its committees at the elected member level.

27. LGNZ’s latest annual report notes that LGNZ has coordinated a sector response to major reforms, including the RMA reforms and Three Waters. LGNZ has also organised webinars about issues raised by the Future for Local Government Review.

28. In the future, there is the possibility of major local government reforms arising from the report of the Future for Local Government Review Panel. If this happens, it could be beneficial for Auckland Council to be a part of a sector approach to those reforms, in which case a future council might choose to rejoin LGNZ if the current council resigns its membership.

29. Issues around climate change will likely become more important in the future and it may be important to coordinate a sector approach to these.

30. Key questions are: should New Zealand have an association of local government? And, if so, should Auckland Council support this even though it might not need to use the resources or services provided by LGNZ?

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

31. As a consequence of the pandemic, LGNZ has held some meetings online but not all. If Auckland Council resigned its membership of LGNZ there would be less air travel between Auckland and Wellington by those attending meetings.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. There are no impacts on the council group.

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

Local impacts and local board views

33. LGNZ exists primarily for elected members (as compared to Taituarā which exists for local government managers). Under the constitution, councils are the members of LGNZ. The constitution recognises local boards by providing a position on the National Council to be elected by Auckland Council’s 21 local boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. The LGNZ National Council has a committee known as Te Maruata. It promotes the participation of Māori in local government and provides a network for Māori elected members.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

35. The current expenditure on LGNZ activities, approximately $400,000, could be used on other Auckland Council activities.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. There is a risk, if Auckland Council is not a member of LGNZ, of Auckland Council not being able to influence the position of the sector on various policy matters. This risk is considered to be low as Auckland Council is large enough to be seen by central government as an important local government participant to be communicated with separately to the sector as a whole.

37. There is a risk to LGNZ that if Auckland Council resigns its membership that this will adversely impact LGNZ’s financial position.

38. Being part of LGNZ has the benefit that the council can socialise Auckland issues with the elected representatives of other councils. There is a risk that Auckland Council could lose the understanding and support of other councils if it withdraws from LGNZ. Loss of support by other councils could affect Auckland Council’s relationship with central government.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. Local board feedback is due on 15 March 2023 and will be collated and reported to the Governing Body.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Carol Hayward - Team Leader Operations and Policy

Oliver Roberts – Acting General Manager, Local Board Services

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 Rodney Co-Operative Lime Company Limited	Vice chairman Committee member Director
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	Robyn Joynes – Local Board Advisor
Authoriser	Lesley Jenkins - Local Area Manager