Agenda of Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

1 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

2 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

3 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

Click the meeting date below to access the minutes.

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 2 March 2023, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

4 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

5 Ngā Kōrero a te Marea | Public Input

5.1 Public Input: West Auckland is Flooding (WAIF) - On-going flooding issues in West Auckland

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Amrita Banger and Derek Judge will address the committee regarding the on-going flooding issues in West Auckland.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Amrita Banger and Derek Judge will speak to the committee about the on-going flooding issues in West Auckland after the recent storm events.

3. The following story has been provided as some background: https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/131285376/i-want-my-life-back-flooded-homeowners-launch-campaign-for-buyout

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the public input from Amrita Banger and Derek Judge on behalf of West Auckland is Flooding regarding the on-going flooding issues in West Auckland and whakamihi / thank them for their attendance.

5.2 Public Input: Quiet Sky Waiheke - Excessive non-essential helicopter movements over Waiheke

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Kim Whitaker will address the committee on behalf of Quiet Sky Waiheke regarding excessive non-essential helicopter movements over Waiheke.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Kim Whitaker will speak to the committee about Quiet Sky Waiheke’s advocacy on the issue of non-essential helicopter movements over Waiheke.

3. Quiet Sky Waiheke addressed the council in July 2021, where it presented a petition of 1400 names of members of the Waiheke community objecting to the process of helipad consenting being followed by the Auckland Planning Department under the current wording of the HGIDP. The organisation advises that since that presentation the number of helipads on the island has increased by over 20% and the need for the views of the community to be heard are greater than ever.

4. Quiet Sky Waiheke addressed the Waiheke Local Board at its meeting held on 22 March 2023 and its response to Item 14: Helicopter Activity – Compliance and Monitoring: findings and options are attached to this report (Attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the public input from Kim Whitaker on behalf of Quiet Sky Waiheke regarding excessive non-essential helicopter movements over Waiheke and whakamihi / thank them for their attendance.

5.3 Public Input: Herne Bay Residents Association - Helicopter activity

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Dirk Hudig, Co-Chair Herne Bay Residents Association will address the committee regarding helicopter activity.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Dirk Hudig will speak to the committee about helicopter activity.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the public input from Dirk Hudig on behalf of the Herne Bay Residents Association regarding helicopter activity and whakamihi / thank them for their attendance.

5.4 Public Input: Quiet Sky Waitematā - issues and impacts of private helicopters in residential areas and the coastal marine environment

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Elena Keith will address the committee on behalf of Quiet Sky Waitematā regarding the issues and impacts of private helicopters in residential areas and the coastal marine environment.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Elena Keith, Chair – Quiet Sky Waitematā will speak to the committee about issues and impacts of private helicopters in residential areas and the coastal marine environment.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the public input from Elena Keith on behalf of Quiet Sky Waitematā regarding issues and impacts of private helicopters in residential areas and the coastal marine environment and whakamihi / thank them for their attendance.

6 Ngā Kōrero a te Poari ā-Rohe Pātata | Local Board Input

6.1 Local Board Input: Waiheke Local Board - Helicopter activity

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Waiheke Local Board chair, Cath Handley will address the committee regarding helicopter activity.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Waiheke Local Board chair, Cath Handley will speak to the committee regarding helicopter activity.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the Waiheke Local Board input regarding helicopter activity

b) whakamihi / thank Waiheke Local Board chair Cath Handley for attending.

7 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Regional Event Fund Grants Allocation 2022/2023 Round 2

File No.: CP2023/01175

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve grant allocations for the 2022/2023 Regional Event Grants Programme Round 2.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The 2022/2023 Regional Event Fund Grants Programme has a budget allocation of $600,000.

3. On 11 August 2022, the Parks, Arts, Community and Events (PACE) Committee approved the allocation of $325,000 out of the budget of $600,000 to applications for regional event grants in the first funding round for 2022/2023 (PAC/2022/66).

4. Applications were sought through a second funding round open from 7 November 2022 to 9 January 2023, to allocate the remaining budget of $275,000.

5. Nineteen applications, totalling $499,695, were received, and assessed using the criteria in the Events Policy 2013.

6. Staff recommend allocating grants to six applicants totalling $176,500.

7. It is also recommended that the unallocated grant programme budget of $98,500 be applied to meet council savings targets.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whakaae / approve the following funding allocations for the 2022/2023 Regional Events Grant Programme Round 2:

Applicant	Event	Recommended funding allocation
Aotearoa Latin American Community Incorporated	Family Day (Latin American)	12,500
New Zealand Eid Day Trust	NZ Eid Day - Eid Al Fitr 2023	12,000
Te Pou Theatre	Whānau Day - Kōanga Festival 2023	12,000
Te Whānau o Waipareira	Matariki KI Waipareira	15,000
The Polyfest Trust	ASB Polyfest	100,000
Pacific Music Awards Trust	Pacific Music Awards	25,000
Total		$176,500

b) whakaae / approve the application of the unallocated grant programme budget of $98,500 towards meeting council savings targets for the current financial year.

Horopaki

Context

8. The 2022/2023 budget includes an allocation of $600,000 for the contestable regional event grants programme.

9. On 11 August 2022, the PACE Committee approved the allocation of $325,000 from the budget of $600,000, to applications for regional event grants in a first funding round for 2022/2023 (PAC/2022/66).

10. Applications for a second funding round, to allocate the remaining budget amount of $275,000, opened on 7 November 2022 and closed on 9 January 2023.

11. Staff received 19 applications totalling $499,695 for this round as detailed in Attachment A.

12. Combined with the 2022/2023 Round 1 this gives an annual total of 49 applications for $1,416,054. This compares with 50 applications for $1,330,021 in 2021/2022.

13. The events funded through the grants programme deliver on a range of outcomes, and benefit communities through building and maintaining a sense of place and connection. This is fundamental to wellbeing and supports recovery from COVID related restrictions and impacts.

14. Maintaining events funding assists with the economic recovery of businesses in the events and associated sectors, many of which have been facing a major downturn in activity.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. Staff assessed each application against regional event funding criteria outlined in the Events Policy 2013 (refer Attachment B).

16. Each application has been assigned an overall score to inform recommendations (refer to Attachment C).

17. The scores are based on the criteria in Table 1, which are weighted according to the percentages indicated for each area of consideration:

Table 1: Grant assessment criteria

Criteria	Weighting (%)
Supports key priorities	12
Delivers desired impacts	12
Expands the variety or range of events on offer	12
Level of positive community benefits generated	12
Amount of community support, involvement and/or active partnerships	12
How effectively the event was run in the past or how well planned	12
Other considerations as outlined in the policy	12
Alignment with Māori priority	8
Alignment with youth priority	8
TOTAL	100%

18. Staff also considered additional factors to determine the amount of funding recommended, such as:

· the event budget

· event plans

· organiser experience

· accessibility

· previous event outcomes

· alignment with key Auckland dates, such as Matariki, or Auckland Anniversary weekend.

19. Whether the applicant had received significant funding from other areas of council for the same event was also factored into the assessment process.

20. The events recommended for funding:

· include many that are free/low cost to attend

· deliver to a range of Auckland’s diverse communities

· are distributed across the region

· support a range of sporting, arts and cultural themes.

21. Of the six events recommended for funding, none are sports related, and six relate to arts and culture.

22. Chart 1 shows the geographic spread of applications recommended for funding.

Chart1: Regional distribution of events recommended for funding

23. The recommended funding allocations are based on the assessment scores against policy criteria and consideration of the additional factors outlined in paragraph 18.

Applications recommended for funding

24. Staff recommend six events be approved for funding and thirteen be declined.

25. Some applications align with the criteria for event funding, as well as criteria for other council grant funds such as arts and culture, and sport and recreation.

26. Staff considered overlaps to ensure a coordinated approach is taken to the overall provision of council funding for these events. In some situations, grants will be provided from one grant fund, and in others the total funding may be shared between two or more grant funds.

27. In the case of events grants to sporting events, the focus is on audience interest and wider social outcomes of the activity, for example social cohesion, identity, and sense of belonging. This differs from other sports related grant programmes which may be more focused towards encouraging participation in, or development of, the sporting activity.

28. Table 2 outlines the events that are recommended to be approved, including the funding amount and alignment with key priorities, as outlined in the funding criteria.

29. The recommended funding amount is intended as a contribution to the total event cost, recognising that council is not the main funding provider in most cases.

30. Funding recommendations in this round have also taken into account increased service requirements for events and recent inflationary impacts. Modest increases have been provided for most events that have previously received funding, and where this funding has generally remained at the same level for several years.

31. An increase in funding for Polyfest 2023 is recommended this year. This is to provide support for the additional costs associated with holding the event over two separate occasions. The Māori stage is being held at the Due Drop Events Centre on a later date than the other stages due to the scheduling of Te Matatini in Auckland.

32. Requested funding of $80,000 for the Matariki ki Waipareira event represents full project cost. The recommendation to provide partial funding of $15,000 will cover 19% of project cost and is just above the average of 16% for grants approved in 2022/2023 round one funding. An aim of the funding approach taken for regional event grants has been for council to be one of a range of funding sources for events. Encouraging diversification helps ensure that the risk to an event upon losing a funder is lower and impact on the viability of the event is reduced.

Table 2: Events recommended for funding and strategic alignment

Event	Alignment with key priorities	Requested funding	Recommended funding
Family Day (Latin American)	Cultural festival, families and children	37,375	12,500
NZ Eid Day - Eid Al Fitr 2023	Cultural event	12,000	12,000
Whānau Day - Kōanga Festival 2023	Māori, families and children	18,454	12,000
Matariki Ki Waipareira	Māori, Pasifika, youth, families	80,000	15,000
ASB Polyfest	Māori, Pasifika, youth, families, celebration of excellence	100,000	100,000
Pacific Music Awards	Pasifika, celebration of excellence	25,000	25,000
Total		$272,829	$176,500

33. The allocation of grants totalling $176,500 from the available remaining regional event grants budget of $275,000 for the year, leaves a residual balance of $98,500 unallocated.

34. It is recommended that this unallocated balance be applied towards meeting council savings targets for the current financial year.

Applications recommended for decline

35. The most common reasons for declining applications are:

· the activity is not within the scope of the grant programme

· the activity is not considered to be of a regional scale

· the activity does not align sufficiently with grant programme priorities

· similar activities are already funded.

36. In some cases, an application may not meet the criteria, but may offer potential for a future successful application. Staff will offer to work with these applicants to assist in presenting a more fully developed event concept plan, that demonstrates alignment with funding priorities.

37. Table 3 indicates the applications staff recommend be declined with the key reasons.

Table 3: Events recommended to be declined

Event	Reason for Decline
Social cohesion & inclusion for Auckland south Asian community - Manakitanga	Smaller scale events across dates and locations, more of a local than regional focus.
Youth Festival 2023	Event focused primarily on local community development outcomes, lesser alignment with regional event priorities.
Marians	Ticketed performance event, out of scope for regional event funding.
Body Positive Men's Retreat 2023	Small scale, retreat style activity.
Marine biosecurity workshop and outreach	Workshop style activity not within scope of regional event funding priorities.
Climbing Youth event series - Auckland climbing college series, and Auckland interschools series	Small scale event spread over a number of dates and locations. Participant focused with limited audience.
Children's Day	Smaller scale event with a local rather than regional focus.
Kra KoTo Kra Easter Weekend Drum & Dance Retreat	Small scale, retreat style activity.
STEM Weekend with Brain Play!	Multiple small scale events within libraries across locations/days.
Roo thala	Ticketed performance event, out of scope for regional event funding.
Auckland Model United Nations	Individual development event for students including workshops, speakers, and discussions. Ticketed. Not within scope of regional event funding priorities.
The Worm – A 2023 Auckland Regional Tour	Theatre performance event across a number of dates and locations. Not within scope of regional event priorities. (Supported by Creative Communities and local board funding.)
Batang Pinoy: Celebrating Filipino Children in NZ	Small scale event.

Event Evaluation

38. Staff evaluate the delivery of funded events through post event reports prepared by organisers. The information from the event facilitation/permitting team, attendance on the day, media and online coverage of the event, along with attendee feedback, including elected members are all taken into consideration.

39. The evaluation assesses whether:

· the event is delivered largely in the manner described in the funding application

· the event is well supported and enjoyed by participants, audiences, and the wider community

· the event aligns with council policy priorities.

40. A council staff member may attend some funded events to obtain insights on the event delivery. The observations inform feedback provided to organisers on what is working well and areas that may be improved.

41. This evaluation process then informs future funding application assessments and recommendations.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

42. The main climate impacts of most regional events are with waste management and transportation to or from an event.

43. The event permitting process and grant funding agreements promote and encourage a range of transport options and zero waste.

44. The impact of climate change may progressively affect events through increased weather variability and severity. This may result in an increasing number of event cancellations, greater costs to mitigate weather impact, and impact on availability of certain sites for events.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

45. Some applications include events taking place in council venues, on council land or receive council funding for other aspects of their work. In these cases, staff consult relevant departments or Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) that may have an interest in the events. This information is taken into account when presenting recommendations for funding.

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

Local impacts and local board views

46. Local boards provided formal feedback to inform the development of the Events Policy 2013. The administrative process associated with the assessment and allocation of the regional event fund applies principles and criteria outlined within the policy.

47. Regional event funding occurs in parallel with, and is complementary to, local event funding rounds operated by local boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48. The Events Policy recognises a responsibility to engage and build relationships with Māori in designing, planning and delivering regional events of mutual interest.

49. The Events Action Plan, which forms part of the policy, places a particular focus on support for Māori events, in the context of a diverse, balanced region-wide programme. This priority is indicated in application information and guides to encourage applications for Māori events.

50. Chart 2 shows comparative analysis of grants provided to events with a Māori focus, including having significant Māori content, participation and/or audience.

Chart 2 – Regional funding provided to events with a Māori focus. 2022/2023 values include amounts proposed in this report.

51. The three events recommended for funding, and considered to have a Māori focus in this 2022/2023 Round 2, are:

· Whānau Day - Kōanga Festival 2023

· Matariki Ki Waipareira

· ASB Polyfest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

52. Staff recommend confirming grants totalling $176,500 as the proposed allocation for the second round from the remaining $275,000 balance of the total 2022/2023 contestable regional event grants budget of $600,000.

53. Staff recommend that the unallocated 2022/2023 budget balance of $98,500 be applied towards meeting council savings targets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

54. There is a risk that events will not be successfully delivered in accordance with event plans submitted in grant applications. Staff mitigate this risk through the assessment process, considering the experience of event organisers, prior experience of holding the event and by attendance at events.

55. In many cases council is one of several funders making independent assessments for funding of an event. The ability of event organisers to raise funding from multiple sources increases confidence in the event proposal.

56. There is risk that applicants for grants may be dissatisfied with the outcomes of funding decisions, both in declining applications and in offering grants at lower levels than amounts requested. This reputational risk is mitigated by applying a consistent decision-making framework supported by policy and providing clear explanations to applicants of the rationale behind decisions.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

57. Following approval from the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee, funding agreements will be prepared, which will include conditions for payment of funding.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Application Summaries
b ⇨	Event Policy - Prioritisation Criteria
c ⇨	Summary Schedule

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

David McIntosh - Senior Business Advisor

Authorisers

Claudia Wyss - Director Customer and Community Services

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Helicopter Activity - Compliance Monitoring Findings

File No.: CP2023/03311

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. This report sets out the result of an investigation into resource consents^[1] for helicopter landing sites and compliance with the consent conditions, in response to clause (c) in the Planning Committee minutes of 5 May 2022 (Resolution PLA/2022/40). Analysis has been carried out on consents in the other Hauraki Gulf Islands and the Waitematā Local Board area. This report primarily covers flight activity commencing April 2021, with specific flight log examination taking place between April 2021 and April 2022. In addition, this report also provides a basic analysis of historic flight patterns relative to Waiheke Island from the period of summer 2020/21 and summer 2022/23 in response to clause (e) of the resolution which seeks this information.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The analysis of resource consents identifies a high level of compliance with consent conditions regarding the number of flights and flight paths. Flight volumes were all found to be within the consented parameters. Non-compliances were identified in association with aircraft types not being followed. Given the age of some of the consents, this could be expected due to changes to the existing helicopter fleet over time. It is noted that the replacement aircraft are generally quieter than older aircraft.

3. Regarding flight activity and patterns, the analysis of flight traffic data showed that Waiheke Island is one of the primary destinations for helicopter flights within the Auckland region, but also highlights that the level of activity is comparable with traffic flying over other urban areas of the city. Figure 7 provides a contextual analysis of helicopter activity in urban Auckland. An analysis based on the 2020-2021 and 2022-2023 data sets of the Auckland Urban Area, shows two levels of activity. Having regard to the 2022-2023 dataset, the first group, with the highest (proportional) level of activity comprises North Shore 50%; and Howick 25%. The second group showing significantly less activity (ranging between 2% and 7% of all activity) is comprised of the Central Business District (CBD) 7%, Waiheke Island 3%, Mangere 3%, Mt Wellington 2%, Papakura 2%, Waitākere 2% and Other^{^[1]} (6%). The proportion of helicopter activity over Waiheke Island (3%) shows it to be comparable with other parts of urban Auckland in terms of helicopter activity.

4. A comparison of Waiheke Island to urban Auckland, focused on busy holiday periods of 2022 (refer Figures 4,5 and 6) identifies that for:

· Labour weekend Waiheke Island receives 30% of all activity compared to urban Auckland which receives 63% (the remaining 6% overflies Waiheke Island).

· May, Waiheke Island receives 20% and urban Auckland receives 72% (the remaining 8% overflies Waiheke Island).

· January, Waiheke Island and urban Auckland have the same level of activity, with both registering 45% of activity (the remaining 10% overflies Waiheke Island).

5. The analysis of flight volumes for Waiheke Island in Figure 2 (Monthly activity) and Figure 3 (weekend activity) showed a seasonal pattern occurring over the summer period - December to March. The highest volumes of activity (landings) occurred in December (264), January (248), February (189) and March (145). A proportion of all flight activity on Waiheke Island can be attributed to airport and emergency services. Figure 9 shows these activities comprise 15% of flights in Dec 2020-Jan 2021, and 22% over Dec 2022-Jan 2023. A proportion of 10%[2] of flights can also be attributed to overflying – with flights that track to and from the Coromandel also often crossing Waiheke Island, without physically landing on the island.

6. The volume of flights occurring over Waiheke Island has been reviewed by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and is not considered to be unsafe.

7. Research of formal helicopter noise complaints registered with the compliance and monitoring team about urban areas of Auckland including Waiheke Island show a low number of complaints made. There were 11 complaints in 2020; 6 complaints in 2021; and 9 complaints in 2022. Between 1 January 2020 – 31 December 2022 the suburbs with the highest number of complaints were Waiheke Island (8), Herne Bay (7) and Kumeu (2). The remainder were individual complaints for suburbs Mairetahi, Matakana, Mount Eden, New Windsor, Onehunga, Riverhead, Rodney, Takapuna, Waiau Pa.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whiwhi / receive the report.

Horopaki

Context

Methodology

8. This investigation was carried out by the Proactive Compliance Unit^{^[3]} using data provided to Auckland Council by both the consent holders and commercial operators located within the Auckland region.

9. A full year of data was requested from the consent holders to consider seasonal variations. The flight data was cross referenced to other data sets and data from commercially available flight tracking software to verify the logs provided by the consent holders provided an accurate record. The analysis showed that record keeping was of a reasonable standard and that under reporting of flights was not an issue.

10. To provide a more complete understanding of helicopter traffic in the region (and to verify whether the logs provided by the consent holders are an accurate record) the analysis of specific flight logs and departure data from three heliports was investigated, and three periods of general traffic analysis were also undertaken to look at the overall traffic volumes and make comparisons with other urban areas of Auckland. This was followed by a further analysis of two time periods 21 December 2020 – 10 January 2021 and 21 December 2022 – 10 January 2023 to provide a snapshot of traffic during the peak summer season.

11. Attention is drawn to the impact of the Covid lockdowns to the 2020-2021 period, affecting Auckland and the lack of overseas visitors. These effects in spring 2021 are clearly seen in the flight data. The impacts of Covid should be taken into account when considering the reported findings about flight patterns.

12. Where conditions required it, flight logs were requested from the consent holders for the period from 05 April 2021 – 06 April 2022. All required logs were provided. Due to the variation in the wording of conditions, the information was provided in a number of ways, with differing amounts of detail as reflected by the individual condition suites. A collated version of the data has been able to be assembled showing all the logged flights within the above period with information on aircraft type, tail identification and flight times.

13. Research showed that the three main commercial helipads in Auckland, being Advanced Flight Onehunga Heliport, Eagle Flight TA Helicopter Me at Mechanics Bay and Heletranz at the Albany Heliport, were also required to provide departure and arrival logs at their heliports and these logs were obtained for the same period. This provided a more complete picture of helicopter traffic in the region but did require over 6,300 movements to be individually analysed and broken down into Waiheke Island destined flights. These heliport logs were cross referenced with the flight logs to find whether there were any flights that may be going unrecorded by the consent holders.

14. The data from the flight logs plus the operator data was analysed to see if unrecorded flights were regularly being made to consented landing sites, flight paths were being followed, and other conditions are being met.

15. Further data has been obtained from Flightradar24 playback, see Attachment C and analysis has taken place to compare traffic to and from Waiheke Island along with other areas of Auckland. This was to identify if traffic volumes are substantially different in Waiheke Island to the remainder of other areas of Auckland, the emphasis being placed on flights over urban populated areas of the city.

16. Initial review of data was carried out, analyzing supplied log data against commercial flight tracking software. The two systems used in this case were ADS-B Exchange, Attachment B and Flight Radar 24, Attachment C. Both platforms have their limitations and are designed for the aviation enthusiast. ADS-B Exchange proved to be the best platform for tracking flights, whereas Flight Radar 24 provided good historical playback information.

17. The ADS-B tracking system only became mandatory from 31 December 2022, so prior to this, not all helicopters were trackable, see Attachment D and Attachment E for more explanation. Furthermore, aircraft details can be blocked from the Flightradar24 platform, with commercial operators citing customer confidentiality for one of the reasons for blocking identifying information. This practice doesn’t mean the aircraft will not appear on the platform or that they are operating illegally, however it will only show the movement and the type of the aircraft.

18. Another issue that was identified through the course of this research was a lack of continuity in tracking an individual helicopter due to the changes to the fleet and helicopter registration over the time investigated (refer to Attachment E Glossary for further information on helicopter registration).

19. For the purposes of this analysis, ‘Urban Area’ was defined as those areas shown in grey on FlightRadar24, as shown below in Figure 1. This was to keep the area consistent between the various years.

Figure 1. Map taken from Flightradar24, showing the ‘urban’ areas of mainland Auckland in grey.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Results and Discussion

Flight Log Data April 2021 – April 2022

20. Analysis of the flight data shows that that the numbers of flights are within the limits set by the relevant consent conditions. Despite the variations in record keeping, there did not appear to be evidence of flights being regularly kept off the flight logs.

21. Over this period, the logs obtained from consented landing sites on Waiheke, Aotea Great Barrier and the Waitemata Local Board area showed a total 1547 helicopter movements* from these sites.

*excludes emergency and overflying

22. Flight tracking on consents in the Hauraki Gulf Islands including Aotea Great Barrier, and for the Waitematā Local Board area showed very low volumes of helicopter traffic and were often associated with emergency services or maintenance works.

23. For the helicopter landings on Waiheke, it was identified that Waiheke Airport, together with vineyards on Onetangi Road Mudbrick Vineyard and Man O War received most of the activity.

24. The CAA have reviewed aircraft movements and do not have any specific concerns with regards to flight safety. Despite the number of consented landing sites on the island they have similarly identified only a small number of sites that are regularly trafficked. In the wider New Zealand context, they have stated other tourist areas such as Franz Josef handle greater volumes of helicopter traffic. This has been reviewed using Airways supplied data see Appendix A for an example.

25. Some of the consents specified certain types of aircraft that could be used. This was the most common type of non-compliance that occurred, particularly for the older consents, which referenced older models which are no longer operational. Further analysis may be required to confirm the noise levels created by the identified aircraft to confirm compliance with the relevant consent conditions.

26. Figure 2 below shows helicopter landings on Waiheke during April 2021 – April 2022 per month. The graph shows that there was a seasonal pattern. Summer and holiday periods showed higher numbers of landings. It is highlighted however that the data is affected by the Covid-19 lockdowns occurring September – November 2021. the Covid lockdown is clearly shown in the data set, it is likely in a normal season this data would be bell shaped in appearance with traffic increasing as we approach the summer months, with a tail off in activity approaching winter.

Chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 2. Total number of Helicopter landings on Waiheke Island during April 2021- April 2022 per month.

27. Figure 3 shows helicopter landings on Waiheke on Weekend days. Flights appeared to be relatively consistent across the week, with 33% of the flights recorded occurring on weekend days.

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 3. Total number of helicopter landings on Waiheke Island during the weekend days of April 2021 – April 2022 (112 days total)

Flight Movements 2022 – comparison of activity on Waiheke with other urban areas during Labour weekend, one week in May; January holiday period

28. A further data set was investigated to look at three periods in time to make direct comparisons between the helicopter traffic over Waiheke and other urban areas. The purpose of this was to understand how busy the airspace is over Waiheke in comparison to the wider urban Auckland area. For this data set, emergency helicopter flights were excluded.

29. The periods investigated were Labour weekend 2022 (Figure 4), a week period in May (Figure 5), and a weekend in the January holiday period (Figure 6). The summer holiday period did see a higher percentage of helicopter flights that flew over Waiheke airspace (either to land or enroute to locations further afield) when compared to a ‘normal’ winter period (May) or a long weekend (Labour Weekend).

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 4. Labour Weekend - October 2022 - helicopter flight movements

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 5. May 2022 - helicopter flight movements

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 6. January 2022 – helicopter flight movements

Flight Movements – 20 December 2020 – 10 January 2021 and 20 December 2022 – 10 January 2023

30. Further analysis was undertaken to compare helicopter movements across 2 separate years during the peak summer holiday season. This analysis also captured the emergency flights and the flights landing at the Waiheke Aerodrome. It is highlighted that the data is provided from Flightradar24 which only retains information for 3 years, as such the analysis covers the periods of 20 December 2020 – 10 January 2021 and 20 December 2022-January 2023. It should also be noted that the 2020-21 period level of activity may be lower than usual due to the effect of Covid-19 restrictions on the general local population and a lack of international visitors.

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 7. Comparisons of the Urban areas which had flights travelling overhead for both time periods.

Note: Determining the urban area affected was subjective as flights often flew over several parts of the city in one flight movement. For the purposes of this data, the area that the helicopter spent the longest time travelling over was recorded.

31. Between the two time periods investigated, the data shows a 38% increase in the total number of flights seen. The percentage increase is however impacted by Covid-19 (and therefore may be less than what is shown), notwithstanding there did appear to be more flight transfers to the international airport and ‘sightseeing’ flights, predominantly over the City and Rangitoto Islands.

32. As a proportion of total flights, the number of flights that landed on Waiheke Island or flew through Waiheke airspace remained essentially the same – approximately 15% for the number of landings and 33% for flights through Waiheke airspace. There was a small increase in flights over the Urban Auckland airspace, from 57% in 20/21 to 62% in the 22/23 period.

33. Flights over Waiheke tended to be during daylight hours, with 87% of flights in 20-21 period and 88% of flights in the 22-23 period occurring between 8:00am – 18:00pm.

34. Complaints logged through the Auckland Council call centre during these times showed that there were very few complaints received from the urban Auckland regions and these primarily related to the associated activity rather than the helicopter itself.

35. Between 1 January 2020 – 31 December 2022, there were 26 complaints about helicopter noise or nuisance logged through council’s official system.

36. Between 1 January 2020 – 31 December 2022 the suburbs with the highest number of complaints were Waiheke (8), Herne Bay (7) and Kumeu (2). The remainder were individual complaints for suburbs Mairetahi, Matakana, Mount Eden, New Windsor, Onehunga, Riverhead, Rodney, Takapuna, Waiau Pa.

37. Table 1 below shows the complaints for each year. There were 11 complaints in 2020; 6 complaints in 2021; and 9 complaints in 2022.

Table 1 – complaints about helicopter noise or nuisance logged through council’s complaints registry

Suburb	2020	2021	2022
Herne bay	4	1	2
Kumeu	1		1
Mairetahi			1
Matakana	1
Mt Eden		1
New Windsor			1
Onehunga			1
Riverhead	1
Rodney	1
Takapuna	1
Waiau Pa	1
Waiheke	1	4	3

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 8. Timings of helicopter flights over Waiheke airspace as a percentage of the total flights recorded between 20 December and 10 January

38. For this data set, the movements of the emergency helicopters (such as Westpac Rescue Helicopter) were also included to provide a wider picture of helicopter movements. It is important to note that the Police Helicopters are not tracked within FlightRadar24 and so these are not included in the data.

Chart, pie chart

Description automatically generated

Figure 9. Total landings on Waiheke Island between 20 December and 10 January for years 2020-2021 and 2022-2023 showing the proportions of landings that were at the Waiheke Airport and for emergency services.

Conclusions

Compliance with consent conditions

39. The flight logs required under the associated resource consents on Waiheke Island between April 2021 – April 2022 show a general compliance with the total numbers of permitted flights.

40. Comparison with the heliport logs during this same period confirm these records and do not indicate that there is a significant issue with flights being incorrectly logged by the consent holders.

41. The main source of non-compliance arises with the type of helicopter that is being used. Craft types specified in some of the consents reflect older models that are not often found or used today. A review by an Acoustic Specialist may be warranted to confirm that the noise levels caused by the newer fleet does not exceed the noise limits intended by the consents.

Patterns of helicopter activity

42. Helicopter activity on Waiheke for the period April 2021 – April 2022 shows a seasonal pattern with the highest levels of activity occurring during the summer period. The monthly levels of activity are shown in Figure 2. The highest volumes of activity (landings) are – December (264), January (248), February (189) and March (145). The activity is shown to occur predominantly in the weekends as shown in Figure 3.

43. Figure 9 shows the proportion of activity from airport and emergency services (combined) in 2020-2021 was 15%, and 22% for the period 2022-23.

The proportion of helicopter activity over Waiheke that is overflying is as follows:

· Labour weekend: 16.666% (refer Figure 4)

· May: 28.57%; (refer Figure 5)

· January: 19.64% (refer Figure 6).

44. Figure 7 shows helicopter activity in Auckland urban areas (as a percentage of all helicopter activity) There are two groups of activity levels. Having regard to the 2022-2023 dataset, the first group, with the highest (proportional) level of activity comprises North Shore 50%; and Howick 25%. The second group showing significantly less activity (ranging between 2% and 7% of all activity) is comprised of the CBD 7%, Waiheke Island 3%, Mangere 3%, Mt Wellington 2%, Papakura 2%, Waitākere 2% and Other^{^[4]} (6%). The proportion of helicopter activity over Waiheke Island (3%) shows it to be comparable with other parts of urban Auckland in terms of helicopter activity.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

45. This is a report analysing helicopter activity and there is no climate impact statement.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

46. This is a report analysing helicopter activity and no council group impacts and views have been sought.

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

Local impacts and local board views

47. This is a report analysing helicopter activity and no local impacts or local board views have been sought.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48. This is a report analysing helicopter activity and no Māori views have been sought.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

49. This is a report analysing helicopter activity and has no financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

50. There are no risks associated with this helicopter activity report as the material is for information only.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

51. There are no next steps associated with this helicopter activity report as the material is for information only.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Airways supplied traffic data
b ⇨	Typical track of flight in ADS-B Exchange
c ⇨	Screen shot of Flghtradar24 tracking
d ⇨	How does ADS-B Exchange work
e ⇨	Glossary

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Graham Jones, Senior Project Specialist, Proactive Compliance

Authorisers

Mervyn Chetty – General Manager Licensing & Regulatory Compliance

Craig Hobbs - Director Regulatory Services

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Making operative Private Plan Change 62 - Onewa Road to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part)

File No.: CP2023/02662

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To make Private Plan Change 62 – Onewa Road to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) operative in accordance with the decision for the independent hearings commissioners.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Plan Change 62 (PC 62) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) (AUP) is a private plan change request from Goldstar Corporation Limited (the requestor) which sought to rezone approximately 1.62 hectares (ha) at 119, 121 and 129 Onewa Road and at 1, 3, 5 and 7 Gladstone Road, Northcote. Specifically, the request seeks to:

a) rezone land from its operative Business - Light Industry Zone to Business - Mixed Use Zone; and

b) amend the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) GIS Viewer to cover the sites with a Height Variation Control allowing buildings up to a height of 21 metres.

3. Leading up to the hearing of PC 62, the Applicant made a modification to their application and reduced the area that amendments would apply, limiting the plan change to only 119, 121 and 129 Onewa Road. This committee will therefore only be making the Business Mixed Use zoning for 119, 121 and 129 Onewa Road operative, which is consistent with the PC 62 Decision.

4. The hearing of submissions on PC 62 was on 8 November 2022 and the Council decision approving (with modifications) PC 62 (Decision) was issued on 18 November 2022. Auckland Council notified the decision of the independent commissioners on 9 December 2022. No Environment Court appeals were received in relation to that decision.

5. The relevant parts of the AUP can now be amended and made operative as set out in the decision dated 18 November 2022 (refer to attachment A).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whakaae / approve Private Plan Change 62 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) under clause 17(1) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

b) tono / request staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which Private Plan Change 62 becomes operative as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Horopaki

Context

Background

6. PC 62 – Onewa Road seeks to:

a) rezone approximately 1.62 hectares at 119, 121, and 129 Onewa Road and at 1, 3, 5 & 7 Gladstone Road, Northcote.

b) amend the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) GIS Viewer to cover the sites with a Height Variation Control of 21 metres.

7. PC 62 was notified on 24 June 2021 and 28 submissions were received. The Summary of Decisions Requested was notified on 13 August 2021. The Summary of Decisions Requested was re-notified on 19 August, closing on 3 September 2021. A total of 16 further submissions were received.

8. The Council hearing for PC 62 was held on 8 November 2022. The hearing was conducted by Independent Hearing Commissioners who were given full delegation to make a decision on PC 62. The Commissioner’s decision to approve (with modifications) PC62 was issued on 18 November 2022. The decision was notified on 8 December 2022.

Appeal

9. No Environment Court appeals were received in relation to PC 62.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the statutory process for plan changes. Clause 17(1) states that “A local authority shall approve a proposed policy statement or plan (other than a regional coastal plan) once it has made amendments under clause 16 or variations under clause 16A (if any).”

11. As the appeal period has closed, and no appeals have been received, the Council can approve PC 62 under clause 17 of Schedule 1. Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the process that is required to be undertaken by the Council to make PC 62 operative.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

12. As a procedural request, impacts on climate change are not relevant to this recommendation.

13. No climate change matters were raised in the PC 62 process. However, it is noted that PC 62 will enable apartment style residential development on Onewa Road, which is serviced by good public transport.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

14. As a procedural request, no views are being sought from any council departments.

15. Both Auckland Transport (AT) and Watercare Services (Watercare) made submissions on PC 62. AT submission raised concerns regarding the Onewa Road and Gladstone Road intersections. The commissioners determined that the current AUP provisions are able to manage the issue.

16. Watercare indicated that matters raised in their submission are able to be resolved at the resource consent stage of the development.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17. Local board views were not sought for this report as making PC 62 fully operative is a procedural matter.

18. The Kaipātiki Local Board views on PC 62 were sought during the PC 62 process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19. As a procedural step, there are no impacts on Māori associated with the approval of PC 62, and it being made operative.

20. It is noted that all the Mana Whenua groups identified on Auckland Council’s mapping whose rohe includes the PC 62 area were notified of the plan change.

21. During the preparation of PC 62, the Applicant engaged with iwi. The section 32 report prepared by the applicant has provided the following details in regards to iwi engagement:

“5.27 With regard to Subsection (4A) of Section 32, the consultation in accordance with Schedule 1 has been initiated and will have the potential to be continued through the formal submission stages for the Proposed Plan Change if issues are still “live” for any of the relevant groups of mana whenua, iwi, hapu or other affected maori and cultural entities.”

22. Of the Mana Whenua who participated in the engagement, Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust have provided a letter dated 14 May 2019.

23. The letter states:

“Our meeting last month with yourself Scott and John provided a level of confidence and comfort now that we have a greater insight into this particular development and understanding of other possible Goldstar Corp projects and initiatives.

We were very impressed with the proposal and we were encouraged by your willingness to connect and build a relationship with Ngāti Paoa, especially as it aligns to our Iwi priorities for employment and housing.

With the enhanced quality of housing, buildings and community features of the proposed rezoning, Ngāti Paoa fully support the changes you are submitting to Council.”

24. The remaining iwi who have interest in the area were notified of PC 62, and apart from the response from Ngāti Paoa (quoted above), no comments or submissions were received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. There are no financial implications associated with making PC 62 operative in full. Approving plan changes and amending the AUP is a statutory requirement and is a budgeted expenditure for the Plans and Places department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. There are no risks associated with making PC 62 fully operative.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. The final step in making PC62 operative is to publicly notify the date on which it will become operative in full, and to update the AUP. This will occur following this committee making resolutions as recommended in this report.

28. Following the committee making the resolutions as recommended in this report, Plans and Places staff will undertake the actions required under Schedule 1 of the RMA to make PC 62 operative in full.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Plan Change 62 Decision

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Todd Elder - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Making operative Private Plan Change 69 - Spedding Block to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part)

File No.: CP2023/02661

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To make Private Plan Change 69 – Spedding Block to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) operative in accordance with the decision of the independent hearings commissioners.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Plan Change 69 (PC 69) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) (AUP) is a private plan change request from Oyster Capital (the requestor) that seeks to rezone approximately 52 hectares of Future Urban Zoned (FUZ) land at Whenuapai to Business – Light Industry Zone (LIZ).

3. In addition, PC 69 sought to include in the AUP a new precinct that includes specific development controls for the plan change area and applies the Stormwater Management Area Control: Flow 1 over the plan change area.

4. The hearing of submissions was in November 2021. Auckland Council notified the decision on 11 November 2022 and notified addendums to the decision on 16 December 2022 and 13 January 2023. No appeals were received in relation to the PC 69 decisions.

5. The relevant parts of the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) can now be amended and made operative as shown in Attachments A to C.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) whakaae / approve Private Plan Change 69 to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) under clause 17(1) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 as shown in Attachments A to C of the agenda report

b) tono / request staff to complete the necessary statutory processes to publicly notify the date on which Private Plan Change 69 becomes operative as soon as possible, in accordance with the requirements in clause 20(2) of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991.

Horopaki

Context

6. PC 69 – Spedding Block seeks to:

a) rezone 52 hectares of land from Future Urban Zone to Business – Light Industry Zone

b) introduce a new precinct called the Spedding Block Precinct into Chapter I Precincts (West) of the AUP

c) apply the Stormwater Management Area Control: Flow 1 to the plan change area.

7. PC 69 was notified on 8 October 2021. 20 submissions were received, and a total of seven further submissions were also received during the further submission period.

8. The Council hearing for PC 69 was held on 11 and 12 May 2022. The hearing was conducted by Independent Hearing Commissioners who were given full delegation to make a decision on PC69. The Council decision to approve (with modifications) PC69 was issued on 20 October 2022. The decision was notified on 11 November 2022, and addendums to the decision were notified on 16 December 2022 and 13 January 2023. No appeals were received in relation to the PC 69 decisions.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9. Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the statutory process for plan changes. Clause 17(1) states that “A local authority shall approve a proposed policy statement or plan (other than a regional coastal plan) once it has made amendments under clause 16 or variations under clause 16A (if any).”

10. As the appeal period has closed, and no appeals have been received, the Council can approve PC 69 under clause 17 of Schedule 1. Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the RMA sets out the process that is required to be undertaken by the Council to make PC 69 operative.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

11. As a procedural request, impacts on climate change are not relevant to this recommendation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

12. As a procedural request, no views are being sought from any council departments.

13. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council did make submissions on PC69, which focused on funding financing of infrastructure. This resulted in expert conferencing and for infrastructure triggers being integrated into the plan change provisions.

14. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council did not appeal the PC 69 decision.

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

Local impacts and local board views

15. Local board views were not sought for this report as making PC 69 fully operative is a procedural matter.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

16. As a procedural step, there are no impacts on Māori associated with the approval of PC 69, and it being made operative.

17. It is noted that all the Mana Whenua groups identified on Auckland Council’s mapping whose rohe includes the PC 69 area were notified of the plan change.

18. From the PC 69 records, as part of initial site investigations, the Applicant engaged with representatives from Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and Te Kawerau a Maki to discuss the proposal and attend a site walkover. Te Kawerau a Maki deferred to Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, who in turn provided an assessment of the historic, traditional, cultural and spiritual relationship of mana whenua to the SBPCA. This was set out in their Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) dated March 2020 prepared by Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara Development Trust (Development Trust) and was provided as part of the application.

19. The CVA identifies that while there are no waahi tapu (ancestral sites) located within the SBPCA, it is thought to be a place where kai and kaimoana was collected due to its proximity to Brigham Creek inlet. The area has been shaped by farming which has altered the natural landscape characteristics of the site however the area also holds cultural importance as Whenuapai is considered a place of coming together between iwi. Several known cultural index sites exist near the SBPCA however none are known within it.

20. The Development Trust is supportive of the plan change as it will bring positive benefit to the wider community by providing employment and infrastructure in close proximity to residential areas and requires minimal modification to the land to make it suitable for development. The CVA makes it clear that the Development Trust expects that the natural systems (streams and wetlands) are enhanced and protected from potential adverse effects of development (as proposed as part of the plan change), and that iwi continue to be involved in the development of the Spedding Block area.

21. The Applicant’s Assessment of Environmental Effects advises that mana whenua will continue to be consulted with through the resource consents process. This is supported by provisions in the AUP.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

22. There are no financial implications associated with making PC 69 operative in full. Approving plan changes and amending the AUP is a statutory requirement and is a budgeted expenditure for the Plans and Places department.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

23. There are no risks associated with making PC 69 fully operative.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

24. The final step in making PC69 fully operative is to publicly notify the date on which it will become operative, and to update the AUP. This will occur following the Council committee resolving in accordance with the recommendations set out in this report.

25. Following the Council committee resolving in accordance with the recommendations set out in this report, Plans and Places staff will undertake the actions required under Schedule 1 of the RMA to make PC 69 operative in full.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	PC 69 - Spedding Block Precinct
b ⇨	PC 69 - Spedding Block Precinct Plans
c ⇨	PC 69 - Spedding Block Zoning

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Todd Elder - Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Endorsement of Watercare's draft Drought Management Plan 2023

File No.: CP2023/03180

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse Watercare’s draft Drought Management Plan (2023 DMP).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Watercare has proposed an updated Drought Management Plan (2023 DMP) to replace the existing Drought Management Plan (2020 DMP) for the governing body’s endorsement.

3. The Drought Management Plan (DMP) is a tactical plan that guides Watercare personnel and communicates the role of Watercare’s customers in responding to drought. The DMP is activated by dam storage levels that signal drought conditions. The DMP then guides operational responses triggered as storage levels lower. These responses include communications and engagement with Watercare customers and the public and escalate to water use restrictions. Watercare’s methodology for setting trigger levels uses historical rainfall trends and results in seasonal variations to the trigger levels.

4. The 2023 DMP changes the trigger levels so that operational responses are activated at lower average dam levels and revises the schedule of water-use restrictions. These changes are justified by the investment in additional sources and treatment plants following the 2020 drought, which increased the drought yield by approximately 73 million litres per day (ML/d) (excluding headroom and outage).

5. The approval of the 2023 DMP lowers the risk of breaching the drought standard by accounting for additional water supply and updated demand projections. This additional supply increases Auckland’s resilience to drought in the short term. However, council staff note that proactive management of peak demand as well as investment in diverse water sources (such as water harvesting and reuse) are critical to increasing resilience in the long-term.

6. The Auckland Water Strategy directs the Council Group to proactively plan for drought conditions in an integrated approach with peak demand management to ensure that everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs. The 2023 DMP does not fully deliver on the action in the Water Strategy to integrate peak demand and drought response by 2025, although Watercare is developing a separate peak management plan. Watercare and council staff have agreed on delivering the next steps in collaboration to achieve the intent of the Water Strategy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) ohia / endorse the 2023 Drought Management Plan (2023 DMP) produced by Watercare.

b) tuhi / note that council staff and Watercare will work collaboratively to develop a peak demand management plan and ensure integration with drought response in alignment with the Auckland Water Strategy.

Horopaki

Context

7. The Auckland Water Strategy (Resolution number ECC/2022/54) sets the strategic direction for water outcomes for the council group. The strategic shifts and actions within the strategy have been developed to deliver the vision of te mauri o te wai, the lifeforce of Auckland’s water, is protected and enhanced.

8. Water Security is one of the eight strategic shifts in the Auckland Water Strategy. The long-term aim of the shift is that Auckland captures, uses and recycles water efficiently so that everyone has access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs. This means:

a) Auckland maximises rainwater capture and invests in recycled water at all scales

b) Aucklanders have equitable access to enough water of the appropriate quality to meet their needs (i.e., residential and commercial)

c) Aucklanders are efficient users of water and can manage their own water security; they are resilient to changes in water availability and a changing climate

d) peak demand is managed to operate within source capacity.

9. Managing water security is a critical role of Auckland Council. The Auckland Water Strategy establishes new water security targets for the council group for 2025, 2030 and 2050. Reducing per-capita demand is critical to enabling water security in the future as the Auckland population grows. More information is available in the Auckland Water Strategy and Water Efficiency Plan 2021-2025^{^[5]}.

10. The Auckland Water Strategy identifies specific actions to achieve the Water Security strategic shift, including the development of an additional level of service for peak demand and for the joint development of a plan to proactively manage peak demand and drought response. In effect, when water use is forecast to be high, agreed proactive and staged demand management (but not necessarily restrictions) would be enabled more frequently than during a one in 20-year event. When developed, this joint plan should include actions at the regional, community, and household levels with clear roles and responsibilities across the council group at different stages of implementation. These expectations are anticipated to transfer to the new Water Services Entity under the Three Waters Reform transition in July 2024.

11. The Water and Wastewater Bylaw (2015)^{^[6]} allows the council to restrict the use of water supplied where it considers the ability to maintain an adequate supply of drinking water is at risk due to drought, emergency, or for any other reason. Watercare’s role is to monitor supply and demand to identify when a drought has been triggered, and the council’s role is to approve and lift associated water restrictions during drought conditions.

12. During extreme dry periods that cause dam levels to drop below the trigger levels in the DMP, the council puts in place water restrictions to ensure Aucklanders are all using water wisely. Restrictions are a prudent, effective, and proactive way of conserving water and minimising wastage during low rainfall periods and are important because the duration of those periods can be uncertain.

13. Auckland experienced a severe drought in 2020, during which dam levels dropped to 42.5 per cent for the first time in 25 years, resulting in restrictions to outdoor water usage between May and October. The drought prompted council and Watercare to invest in additional water sources, various water saving campaigns, and a leak detection programme. Together with the flooding events of 2023, council staff note that increasing climate variability is likely to cause more extreme fluctuation in rainfall, which should be considered in drought management planning.

14. Council has an operative non-statutory Drought Standard for Watercare that sets two Levels of Service. Watercare design their infrastructure (water sources and storage) to meet this standard so that Watercare’s network can continue to supply water to Aucklanders in a 1 in 100-year drought. The Levels of Services are:

a) Proactive demand restrictions will be required no more frequently than that required for an event with a 5% probability of occurring in any given year.

b) (Drought Standard): Annual average demand within the metropolitan supply area can be met in a severe drought (modelled to have a 1% probability of occurring in any year) while leaving 15% residual capacity in its water supply lakes. Watercare can supply the required volume of potable water to meet demand during a severe drought while keeping the combined lake storage volume of all Auckland’s water supply dams (total system storage or TSS) above 15%.

15. These levels of service mean that a Watercare customer can expect unrestricted water supply with restrictions no more frequently than a 20-year event and that dam levels will remain at or above 15%, even during a 1 in 100-year drought event.

16. The Drought Management Plan (DMP) is designed to ensure sufficient water is available to meet Aucklanders’ core needs and to comply with the drought standard set by Auckland Council. Watercare currently has an operational DMP that has been in place since 2020. The DMP is updated on average every two years, although trigger levels may be reviewed annually when changes to Total System Storage (TSS) impact the headroom between water demand and water available for supply. Matters of relevance in the 2023 DMP were presented for discussion to Watercare’s Board on 2 August 2022 in a presentation titled, “A Resilient Water Supply”.^{^[7]}

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

17. The 2023 DMP would lower drought response triggers by between 5-10% of dam capacity on average. Triggers are based on dam supply levels and activate drought responses, including restrictions at certain levels. Setting trigger levels requires striking a balance to avoid drought responses that are too frequent or too late, as well as weighing the increased cost of continuing water supply against the socio-economic cost of drought restrictions to communities. The following two graphics and subsequent table outline the changes in trigger levels for each stage of drought response (current and proposed).

Chart

Description automatically generated

Drought Trigger Levels - 2020 DMP (current)

Chart, bar chart

Description automatically generated

Drought Trigger Levels – 2023 DMP (proposed, graph produced August 2022)

Summary Table of Proposed Drought Trigger Changes:

Drought Preparedness/

Voluntary Savings (% Total System Storage)

Stage 1

(% Total System Storage)

Stage 2

(% Total System Storage)

Stage 3

(% Total System Storage)

Stage 4 / Reserve Storage (2020)

(% Total System Storage)

2020 DMP

75%- Jan

61%- Jul

65% - Jan

51%- Jul

52% - Jan

49%- May

44%- Dec

30%- May

15% year-round

2023

DMP

70%- Jan

58%- Jul

55%- Jan

45%- Jul

45%- Jan

38%- May

38%- Dec

25%- May

15% year-round

Analysis

Decrease ~7.5%

Decrease ~ 8%

Decrease ~ 9%

Decrease ~5.5%

No change

18. Trigger levels were modified to account for the increase in Auckland’s water supply from 2020 and by using long-run supply-demand modelling in Watercare’s integrated source management model (ISMM). Following the 2020 drought, new sources and treatment plants were brought into service, including Hays Creek Dam in February 2021 (an increase of 12 million litres per day (ML/d)), two bores with a treatment plant to support Pukekohe’s water supply (additional 5 ML/d) and the ‘Waikato 50 treatment plant’ supplied by the Waikato River (additional 50 ML/d).^{^[8]}

19. The Voluntary Savings band (considered ‘Drought Preparedness’ in the 2020 DMP) provides a tool for proactive responses by Aucklanders before restrictions are put in place. Responses in this band are not enforced and provide an opportunity for Aucklanders to be active participants in managing their own water security, in keeping with the goals of the Auckland Water Strategy. Providing Aucklanders with timely information on their water consumption – for example through the rollout of smart-meters – can support the impact of these responses in staving off drought restrictions.

20. As water demand is projected to grow in Auckland to support a growing population, the Waikato River will remain a critical source for complying with the drought standard. Watercare currently holds two 150 ML/d resource consents for takes from the Waikato River, which may be reduced by Waikato Regional Council during low river flows by 15%. The proposed DMP will not require greater takes from the Waikato than are currently consented.

21. The 2023 DMP does not refer to a peak demand level of service, however Watercare will collaborate with the council throughout 2023 to develop a peak demand plan. This level of service may be triggered by additional dry condition data, such as soil moisture, groundwater levels, streamflow, and potential evapotranspiration deficit (PED).

22. It is acknowledged that certain directives from the Water Strategy around demand reduction and alternative sources have an impact on when restrictions would be triggered but are accounted for in other related plans. Demand reduction is addressed in Watercare’s Water Efficiency Plan 2021-2025 (WEP)^{^[9]} and investment in alternative sources are addressed in Watercare’s 2014-2021 Asset Management Plan (AMP).^{^[10]}

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. The 2023 DMP recognises that drought management is impacted by increasingly unpredictable weather patterns due to climate change. The trigger levels and drought responses are based on prevailing supply, demand, and operational parameters and the 2023 DMP notes these will be updated when those change.

24. Council staff note that continued reliance on new water sources to meet growing demand is not sustainable and threaten Auckland’s long-term resilience, especially with increasing climate variability and more fluctuation in rainfall. Proactive management of peak demand as well as investment in diverse water sources (such as water harvesting and reuse) are critical to increasing resilience in the long-term.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. Implementation of the DMP is a shared responsibility between Watercare and Auckland Council. Watercare remains responsible for monitoring supply and demand to identify when a drought has been triggered, and Auckland Council retains responsibility for approving and lifting any necessary water restrictions.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. Local boards were not consulted in the development of the 2023 DMP. Watercare did consult with commercial customers and residential customers via two workshops on triggers and restrictions. Additionally, Watercare has used the learnings from a series of customer forums and regular interaction with key customers and council staff in developing the 2023 DMP.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The Independent Māori Statutory Board lists environmental resilience, protection, and management as an issue of significance for Māori, stating that Auckland Council Group should ensure that Māori are partners in the development and maintenance of all infrastructure pertaining to coast, land, air and water that supports Māori environmental outcomes^{^[11]}.

28. Watercare did not engage with individual iwi/hapū on the 2023 DMP, but sought and incorporated feedback from the Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum on water supply and drought response. A draft of the 2023 DMP was also circulated for feedback to the Chair of the Mana Whenua Managers Kaitiaki Forum, Tame TeRangi, who inquired about the application of some portions of the 2023 DMP to the proposed Water Services Entity A in the Three Waters Reform. The queries and comments were acknowledged and to be reconsidered in the next update of the DMP, provided that the Water Services Entity A exists at that time.

29. The 2023 DMP is consistent with the agreement and consent for water takes from the Waikato River, however, council staff note its relevance for mana whenua impacted by Auckland’s reliance on the Waikato River to enhance drought resilience. The Waikato Tainui iwi management plan^{^[12]} recommends that consent holders progressively improve practices to efficiently lower water use as a method to enable the creation of allocable space to allow allocation of water to Waikato-Tainui for the social, cultural, spiritual, environmental, and economic health and wellbeing of Waikato-Tainui and the Waikato Tainui rohe. This further underscores the importance of proactively managing peak demand and investing in diverse alternative sources, which are progressed through plans outside the 2023 DMP.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. Adequately preparing for and responding to droughts presents various financial implications. In addition to compliance with the drought standard, Watercare’s drivers for setting the trigger levels also include weighing the socio-economic cost of restrictions to the community, financial cost of continued water supply to Watercare, and investment in supply infrastructure and monitoring. Watercare has provided an explanation of these trade-offs to Auckland Council and can provide an analysis upon request.

31. The investment in additional water sources in response to the 2020 drought cost Auckland $230 million, while affording additional resilience to drought conditions. The trigger levels have been lowered to reflect this additional supply.

32. The proposed restrictions in the 2023 DMP are progressive. Activating the triggers at lower average dam levels is intended to have a positive socio-economic impact on communities by reducing water scarcity during periods of low rainfall, including for public amenity and social infrastructure that supports liveability, such as parks and playing fields.

33. Council staff have not run a cost-benefit analysis on the 2023 DMP but concur with Watercare’s rationale. Council staff note the potential for greater overall cost-savings by adding an intermediate level of service and associated peak management plan to proactively prepare for and further avoid water restrictions.

34. Watercare staff note that source selection is independent of the DMP. While the Waikato will continue to be a critical water source for Auckland, the 2023 DMP will not require greater takes from the Waikato than are currently consented.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. Retaining the 2020 DMP trigger levels risks breaching the drought standard set by the council more frequently than allowed for. The status quo fails to respond to updated information on water supply modelling for Auckland and may trigger drought responses too often. An over-activation of drought triggers jeopardises Watercare’s and the council’s credibility with Aucklanders on the risk and recommended responses to drought conditions.

36. By lowering the trigger levels for drought response, the 2023 DMP lowers the threshold for a drought based primarily on the addition of new water sources. The reassurance of additional supply could reduce incentives to proactively manage peak demand for water, which is key to improving Auckland’s drought resilience in the long-term. Mitigating this risk requires cohesive water security planning that considers the relationship between demand management and drought response. Watercare’s preparation of a peak demand management plan represents a first step and next steps have been agreed between Watercare and council staff.

37. Council staff note that continued reliance on new water sources to meet growing demand could manifest in a repetition of this pattern and threaten Auckland’s long-term resilience, especially with increasing climate variability and more fluctuation in rainfall. Mitigation of this risk requires investment in both proactive management of peak demand, as well as investment in diverse water sources (for example water harvesting and reuse). Pilots are already underway by Watercare and next steps have been agreed between Watercare and council staff.

38. Approving the 2023 DMP presents a minor risk to the council‘s reputation, as some members of the public may perceive this as a riskier approach to drought management without the full context of additional water supplied to Auckland since 2020. Watercare has engaged with commercial customers and residential customers in a series of workshops in the development of the 2023 DMP to mitigate this risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

39. Once accepted, the 2023 DMP will replace the existing 2020 DMP. The operative 2023 DMP will put the new trigger levels in place with the associated schedule of restrictions. Note that, as is currently the case, the council will be asked to enact restrictions in the event of a drought.

40. Further collaboration will be required between council staff and Watercare to deliver on Water Strategy direction towards achieving Water Security. Council staff will work with Watercare to set an intermediate level of service for peak demand management and trigger levels for the new level of service that could be based on additional dry condition data, such as soil moisture, groundwater levels, streamflow, and potential evapotranspiration deficit (PED). Watercare and council staff will identify collaborative actions in drought response and recovery activities (for example drought support to rural Aucklanders through service provisioning to water carriers) and investment in alternative sources.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Auckland Drought Management Plan (DMP) March 2023

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Olivia Blanchette - Senior Analyst Natural Environment Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Infrastructure Strategy 2024: Long-term issues for Auckland's infrastructure

File No.: CP2023/02751

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek endorsement of the significant long-term issues for infrastructure to be used as the framework for Auckland Council’s 2024 30-year Infrastructure Strategy, which is part of the 2024-34 Long-term Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Council’s 2021 Long-term Plan sets out $284B in infrastructure investment over 30 years.

3. Auckland Council’s 30-year Infrastructure Strategy is a statutory requirement of the Long-term Plan. The legislation (section 101B(2) of the Local Government Act 2002) requires significant long-term infrastructure issues to be identified for infrastructure investment over the period of the Infrastructure Strategy.

4. Seven issues for infrastructure are recommended as significant and appropriate to inform the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy, they are: greenhouse gas emissions, resilience, growth, inequity, funding gaps, Te Ao Māori infrastructure, and environmental degradation.

5. As the significant issues for the Infrastructure Strategy, these issues will be used to maintain a focus on long-term challenges as we develop plans for infrastructure investment over the next 30 years. The Infrastructure Strategy and the identified issues also specifically direct focus and scenarios in the development of the 10-year budget (Long-term Plan). This provides the opportunity to consider and balance different investment priorities as decisions are made.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) tautoko / endorse the significant infrastructure issues to inform the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy - greenhouse gas emissions, resilience, growth, inequity, funding gaps, Te Ao Māori infrastructure and environmental degradation.

b) tuku / propose to the Governing Body that investment plans developed in the long-term plan be considered against these seven significant infrastructure issues.

c) tono / request that a copy of this report be provided to the chairs of the Governing Body and the Transport and Infrastructure Committee.

Horopaki

Context

6. A 30-year Infrastructure Strategy is required by the Local Government Act 2002. Section 101B(2) sets out the purpose of the infrastructure strategy, “to:

a) Identify significant infrastructure issues for the local authority over the period covered by the strategy; and

b) Identify the principal options for managing those issues and the implications of those options“

7. The Infrastructure Strategy was added to the legislation to be the part of the long-term plan where council must provide assurance that it is:

· Maintaining a focus on long-term challenges, to balance against the short-term pressures and 10-year timeframe of the LTP budget;

· Testing and considering our options for infrastructure investment; and

· Considering evidence of how our infrastructure investment is delivering on the Auckland’s infrastructure challenges.

8. The Infrastructure Strategy helps us plan for the infrastructure systems that support our communities now and in the future; and presents a transparent view of Council’s infrastructure investment.

9. Council identifies long-term issues that Auckland’s infrastructure does and will face by considering our infrastructure asset portfolios, their value and current condition, the change in demand(s) they face, and their associated investment needs, in the context of trends in Auckland over next 30-plus years (largely based on the Auckland Plan 2050).

10. This report presents the significant issues that are recommended to form the framework for Council’s 2024 Infrastructure Strategy.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Infrastructure Strategy 2021: significant issues for infrastructure

11. The 2021 Infrastructure Strategy included five significant infrastructure issues (Figure 1). While each issue is significant to all of Council’s activities, the Infrastructure Strategy focusses on how the issues impact Council’s long-term infrastructure planning and investment.

Figure 1: Auckland Council 2021 Infrastructure Strategy - significant infrastructure issues

12. These 2021 issues were identified and shaped, drawing on:

· The key challenges in the Auckland Plan;

· Infrastructure Strategy guidance from the Office of the Auditor General; and

· Legislative drivers of infrastructure investment (e.g. public health and safety).

13. The five significant issues included in the 2021 Infrastructure Strategy were also identified based on the maturity of Council’s response (see Figure 2). The figure shows that as issues emerge and mature, they progress through stages of defining and understanding an infrastructure response, before an infrastructure investment response begins, and is eventually embedded in our investment programmes.

14. The Infrastructure Strategy focusses on issues that are ‘live’ for consideration in the long-term Plan. These are issues where assurance is required around an investment response, and often where trade-off decisions are made between issues and investments. These assurances and trade-offs practically occur in relation to those issues that have reached the level of maturity where they have a policy response and where investment in relation to that policy is beginning to be made (the grey box in Figure 2).

15. The issues that are well established (such as health and safety) continue to inform infrastructure programmes and are understood to require ongoing investment, but this investment is not the focus of trade-off decisions. Additionally, those issues that are not sufficiently mature (such as infrastructure system lock-in) do not have an understood investment response that could be considered in budget-making.

Text

Description automatically generated

Figure 2: Maturity of infrastructure response to significant issues

2024 Infrastructure Strategy: review of the significant issues for infrastructure

16. Our understanding of, and response to, significant infrastructure issues matures over time. Since the adoption of the 2021 Infrastructure Strategy, Council has taken significant steps in relation to a number of infrastructure issues – for instance through providing new strategic direction in Te Rautaki Wai a Tāmaki Makaurau: The Auckland Water Strategy, Te Ara Whakaheke Tukuwaro Ikiiki: Transport Emissions Reduction Pathway, and Ngā Hapori Momoho: Thriving Communities. We must therefore review these issues to determine a relevant set of issues for the upcoming 2024 Infrastructure Strategy.

17. The review of issues was done using the following approach:

· Step 1: Identifying issues relevant to infrastructure planning and investment across all Council infrastructure portfolios. The issues were identified through a review of current drivers and potential future drivers for infrastructure investment captured in Council’s adopted strategy since 2021, the Auckland Plan three-yearly progress report, Te Waihanga’s New Zealand Infrastructure Strategy, legislative drivers of investment, and the Council’s futures toolkit.

· Step 2: Assessing the maturity of the Council’s infrastructure response to the issues identified in Step 1 using the maturity framework described in Figure 2 above. The maturity assessment indicates the issues that are at the level of maturity to inform long-term infrastructure planning and investment (see Figure 3).

18. The issues identified, and an assessment of their maturity can be found in Attachment A to this report. Figure 3 below presents the outcomes of the assessment, and in particular highlights (in the grey section) those issues that have established Council policy and are ready or beginning to become major drivers for infrastructure investment. These are the issues that are at a level of maturity to be constructively considered in the Infrastructure Strategy.

Figure 3: Maturity assessment of long-term issues facing Auckland's infrastructure

19. The assessment also identifies issues that are emerging. Emerging issues will be considered again for the 2027 Infrastructure Strategy, for instance managed retreat and regenerative/mauri enhancing infrastructure.

Infrastructure Strategy 2024: Recommended significant issues for infrastructure

20. Figure 3 above presents too many issues to be practically applied through the Infrastructure Strategy. Therefore, we propose that the issues that are at an appropriate level of maturity be grouped into useable themes (Table 1).

Table 1: Recommended significant-issue groupings for Auckland Council's 2024 Infrastructure Strategy

Significant issue grouping	Relationship to infrastructure	Contains sub-issues
Greenhouse gas emissions	Infrastructure contributes to regional emissions targets, including reducing operational and embodied emissions.	Emissions reduction
Resilience	Auckland’s infrastructure is future-proofed to adapt to climate change and be resilient to extreme weather events.	Climate adaptation, hazards, infrastructure resilience to extreme weather events
Growth	Infrastructure supports and informs growth in the right places.	Accommodating growth, growth in the right places
Inequity	Infrastructure supports a fairer, more sustainable Tamaki Makaurau.	Equity and social cohesion
Funding gaps	Getting the greatest return on our infrastructure investment.	Prioritising investment, funding renewals/depreciation
Te Ao Māori infrastructure	Infrastructure investment supports positive Māori outcomes.	Te Ao Māori infrastructure
Environmental degradation	Infrastructure supports the life-supporting capacity of the environment.	Environmental degradation, Te Mauri o Te Wai, circular economy

21. The seven themes captured in Table 1 are recommended as they reflect the existing commitments we’ve made with our communities and the broad range of challenges infrastructure will face over the long term. These groupings also provide sufficient continuity from the issues used in 2021 – with five of the issues remaining largely the same.

22. The inclusion of Te Ao Māori infrastructure and environmental degradation adds issues that could not be well captured within the 2021 issues. Māori outcomes are an issue for infrastructure planning as mana and mauri have historically been diminished through our infrastructure systems and can be enhanced through future investment. Environmental degradation has also been a result of past infrastructure and land-use decisions. Protecting the life-supporting capacity of Auckland’s natural environment will require long-term effort and investment in Council infrastructure.

23. The seven issues in Table 1 will shape the long-term view of investment presented in the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy. These issues are expected to continue to be significant through the next 30 years and therefore are all required to fulfil the Strategy’s role of maintaining a focus on long-term challenges.

24. Within the frame of these long-term issues, we recognise that there is also a need to prioritise investment now. The development of a 10-year budget within the Long-term Plan provides this opportunity for prioritisation decisions to be made as scenarios for investment are considered and balanced.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25. This report supports the inclusion of climate change in Auckland Council’s long-term planning.

26. The recommended significant issues for the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy include both greenhouse gas emissions and resilience (including climate adaptation). The inclusion of these climate-focussed issues in the Strategy supports their consideration in planning for investment in Auckland Council’s infrastructure systems over 30+ years.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. Infrastructure providers across the Council group are engaged in the development and implementation of the Infrastructure Strategy. Data from and discussions with the infrastructure providers inform the assessment of Council’s maturity of response to big infrastructure issues (Attachment A). Engagement with our infrastructure providers will also support the analysis of these significant issues in the 2024 Strategy.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. The recommended Infrastructure Strategy issues are regionally focussed and long-term. However, the inclusion of these issues in the Infrastructure Strategy will enable them to be considered against the specific investment plans of our infrastructure portfolios which are, in many instances, local, as they comprise fixed assets and locally provided services.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. The recommended significant issues for the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy includes Māori outcomes. The inclusion of Māori outcomes in the Infrastructure Strategy supports its consideration in planning for investment in Auckland Council’s infrastructure systems over 30+ years.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. The significant issues identified for the Infrastructure Strategy will support decision-making on Council’s 2024 Long-Term Plan and 10-year budget. It does this by specifically directing focus and scenarios for the development of the 10-year budget (Long-term Plan). Staff will use the Infrastructure Strategy issues to provide advice on long-term implications of Council’s infrastructure investment.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31. Assessment of the maturity of Auckland Council’s response to significant infrastructure issues can be limited by the identification of issues and the datasets available to demonstrate our investment response. Whilst care has been taken to ensure that the issues and data used are valid and accurate, the significant issues identified for the 2024 Infrastructure Strategy do rely on this information. The long-term and changing nature of these issues means that regular review, with each three-yearly iteration Infrastructure Strategy, is planned.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The Governing Body will receive the draft Infrastructure Strategy through the development of the long-term plan in late 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Review of significant long-term issues for Auckland's infrastructure

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Megan Howard - Principal Advisor Infra Strategy

Greer Lees - Manager Infrastructure Strategy

Authorisers

Jacques Victor – General Manager Auckland Plan Strategy and Research

Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

Planning, Environment and Parks Committee

30 March 2023

Summary of Planning, Environment and Parks Committee information memoranda, workshops and briefings (including the Forward Work Programme) - 30 March 2023

File No.: CP2023/02663

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A.

2. To whiwhi / receive a summary and provide a public record of memoranda, workshop and briefing papers that may have been held or been distributed to committee members.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of information circulated to committee members via memoranda/workshops and briefings or other means, where no decisions are required.

4. As noted previously decisions on the Annual Budget may well affect the forward work programme. The work programme underpinning the long-term scope of work as a result of the flooding events will also mean that this work programme will need to be reprioritised and updated. Items raised at committee where work continues, as well as items from departmental work programmes, are being worked through and in coming iterations will be highlighted on the forward work programme as appropriate.

5. The following memoranda/information have been sent:

Date	Subject
Feb 2023	Auckland Plan Three Yearly Progress Report 2023 – Full report
Feb 2023	Auckland Plan Three Yearly Progress Report 2023 – Summary version
3/3/2023	Auckland Council’s technical staff submission on Draft Hauraki Gulf Fisheries Plan
13/3/2023	Auckland Council technical staff submission on Review of the resource Management (Infringement Offences) Regulations 1999
22/3/2023	Memorandum – Regional Sector update on Freshwater Farm Plan framework
27/3/2023	Memorandum – Boat haul out and hardstand provision in Auckland

6. The following workshops/briefings have taken place for the committee:

Date	Subject
22/3/2023	Auckland Unitary Plan – Proposed Plan Change 78 – Intensification – Confidential, no attachment
22/3/2023	Future Development Strategy, Confidential, no attachment

7. These documents can be found on the Auckland Council website, at the following link:

http://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/

o at the top left of the page, select meeting/te hui “Governing Body” from the drop-down tab and click “View”;

o under ‘Attachments’, select either the HTML or PDF version of the document entitled ‘Extra Attachments’.

8. Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this summary. Governing Body members should direct any questions to the authors.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the progress on the forward work programme appended as Attachment A of the agenda report

b) whiwhi / receive the Summary of the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee information memoranda, workshops and briefings – 30 March 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Planning, Environment and Parks Committee - Forward Work Programme
b ⇨	Auckland Plan Three Yearly Progress Report 2023 – Full report, February 2023 (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Auckland Plan Three Yearly Progress Report 2023 – Summary version, (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Auckland Council technical staff submission on Draft Hauraki Gulf Fisheries Plan, 3 March 2023 (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇨	Auckland Council technical staff submission on Review of the resource Management (Infringement Offences) Regulations 1999, 13 March 2023 (Under Separate Cover)
f ⇨	Memorandum – Regional Sector update on Freshwater Farm Plan framework, 22 March 2023 (Under Separate Cover)
g ⇨	Memorandum - Boat haul out and hardstand provision in Auckland, 27 March 2023 (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Sandra Gordon - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Megan Tyler - Chief of Strategy

[1] The majority of landing sites identified had a resource consent, with a small number that were covered by Existing Use Rights. Of the consented sites, there were variations in the consent conditions, and some did not require the consent holder to provide flight records. For the consents that did require logs to be provided, these were all obtained and analysed.

[2] based on the 2020-2021 and 2022-2023 data sets

[3] This review has been conducted by the Proactive Compliance Unit within Licensing and Regulatory Compliance due to the volume of general flight movements monitored.

[5] Auckland Water Efficiency Plan 2021-2025 https://assets-au-01.kc-usercontent.com/e86000d0-1334-02a5-836a-a502aff2554f/b51bcff4-bba0-4584-aa07-8ae6ee6212a5/Watercare-Water-efficiency-Plan-2021-2025.pdf

[7] https://wslpwstoreprd.blob.core.windows.net/kentico-media-libraries-prod/watercarepublicweb/media/watercare-media-library/board-meetings/watercare_public_agenda_and_board_papers_2_aug_2022.pdf

[8] Watercare Asset Management Plan (2021-2041) https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/media/yoohwxhv/watercare-amp-2021-2041.pdf

[9] Auckland Water Efficiency Plan 2021-2025 https://assets-au-01.kc-usercontent.com/e86000d0-1334-02a5-836a-a502aff2554f/b51bcff4-bba0-4584-aa07-8ae6ee6212a5/Watercare-Water-efficiency-Plan-2021-2025.pdf

[10] Asset Management Plan 2021-2041 https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/media/yoohwxhv/watercare-amp-2021-2041.pdf

Chairperson	Cr Richard Hills
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Angela Dalton
Members	IMSB Member Edward Ashby	Cr Mike Lee
	Cr Andrew Baker	Cr Kerrin Leoni
	Cr Josephine Bartley	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Mayor Wayne Brown	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Chris Darby	Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson, JP
	Cr Julie Fairey	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Alf Filipaina, MNZM	Cr Ken Turner
	Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Lotu Fuli	Cr John Watson
	IMSB Member Hon Tau Henare	Cr Maurice Williamson
	Cr Shane Henderson

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