|
Franklin Local
Board
09 May 2023
|
|
Franklin Local Board consultation
feedback and input into the Annual Budget 2023/2024
File No.: CP2023/04983
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
receive consultation feedback from the Franklin Local Board area on:
· proposed
priorities and activities for the Franklin Local Board Agreement 2023/2024
· proposed
local activities to discontinue, reduce spending on, or
increase fees to meet the Governing Body’s proposed reduction in
local board funding
· regional
topics and related policies for the Annual Budget 2023/2024.
2. To
recommend any local matters to the Governing Body that they will need to
consider or make decisions on in the Annual Budget 2023/2024 process.
3. To
provide input on the proposed regional topics in the Annual Budget 2023/2024 to
the Governing Body.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
4. Local
board agreements set out annual funding priorities, activities, budgets, levels
of service, performance measures and initiatives for each local board area.
Local board agreements for 2023/2024 will be included in Auckland Council’s
Annual Budget 2023/2024.
5. Auckland Council publicly consulted from 28 February to 28 March
2023 to seek community views on the proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024.
This included consultation on the Franklin Local Board’s proposed
priorities for 2023/2024 to be included in their local board
agreement and proposed local activities to discontinue, reduce spending
on, or increase fees to meet the Governing Body’s proposed reduction in
local board funding.
6. Auckland Council received 41,147 pieces of
feedback in total across the region and 1142
submissions from the Franklin local board area.
7. There is support for the local priorities for the Franklin local
board area, with 76% of respondents supporting all or most of the priorities.
8. The top three local priorities to maintain funding for are:
parks, reserves and community facility maintenance, protection and restoration
of waterways, and environmental restoration and pest control programmes.
9. Of the 862 responses to the proposal to investigate a targeted rate
for trails in Franklin, 48% were in support, 41% opposed and 11% responded
‘don’t know’ or ‘other’.
10. In the Annual Budget process there are financial matters where local
boards provide recommendations to the Governing Body, for consideration or
decision-making. This includes any local board advocacy initiatives. The Governing Body will consider these items as part of the Annual
Budget decision-making process in June 2023.
11. Local boards have a statutory responsibility to provide
input into regional strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. This report
provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input on council’s
proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Franklin Local Board:
a) receive consultation feedback on the
proposed Franklin Local Board priorities and activities
for 2023/2024 including proposed local activities to discontinue, reduce
spending on, or increase fees, to meet the reduction in local board funding
proposed by the Governing Body.
b) receive consultation feedback on regional topics in the Annual
Budget 2023/2024 and related policies from people and organisations based in
the Franklin local board area.
c) provide input on regional topics in the proposed Annual Budget
2023/2024 and related policies to the Governing Body.
d) provide advocacy on any local initiatives for
the Annual Budget 2023/2024 to the Governing Body.
Horopaki
Context
12. Each
financial year Auckland Council must have a local board agreement (as agreed
between the Governing Body and the local board) for each local board area. The
Franklin Local Board Agreement sets out how the Council will reflect the
priorities in the Franklin Local Board Plan 2020 in respect to the local
activities to be provided in the local board area. It includes information
relating to budgets, levels of service, and performance measures.
13. The local
board agreements 2023/2024 will form part of Auckland Council’s Annual
Budget 2023/2024.
14. Auckland Council publicly consulted from 28 February to 28 March
2023 to seek community views on the proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024, as
well as local board priorities and proposed activities to be
included in the local board agreement 2023/2024.
15. Auckland Council has faced ongoing budget challenges and recent and
rapid increases in inflation and interest rates has placed significant
pressure on the council’s financial position. A forecast budget
deficit of $295 million needs to be addressed in the council’s proposed
Annual Budget 2023/2024.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
16. This report includes analysis of consultation feedback, any local
matters to be recommended to the Governing Body and seeks input on regional
topics in the proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024.
Consultation
feedback overview
17. As part of
the public consultation Auckland Council used a variety of methods and channels
to reach and engage a broad cross section of Aucklanders to gain their feedback
and input into regional and local topics.
18. In
total, Auckland Council received feedback from 41,147 people in the
consultation period. This feedback was received through:
· written
feedback – 36,659 hard copy (12 per cent) and online (70 per cent) forms,
emails (5 per cent) and letters/other (2 per cent).
· in
person – 4488 pieces of feedback through Have Your Say events (six of
which were held in the Franklin local board area).
All feedback will be made available on an Auckland Council
webpage called “Submissions on the Annual Budget 2023/2024” and
will be accessible from 26 April 2023 through the following link: https://akhaveyoursay.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/submissions-annual-budget-2023-2024.
Feedback
received for the Franklin Local Board for 2023/2024
19. 836 submissions were received on Franklin Local
Board’s priorities for 2023/2024.
20. Seven submissions were received from mana whenua iwi with
interests in the Franklin Local Board area, and feedback was also received
through an Ara Kōtui hui and the Huakina Marae Forum.
21. Thirty submissions were received from organisations, of
which sixteen were from local organisations that commented on local priorities.
22. Consultation feedback on local board priorities will be
considered by the local board when approving their local board agreement
between 20-22 June 2023.
Key priorities in Franklin Local Board Area in 2023/2024
23. The Franklin Local Board consulted on the following priorities for
2023/2024:
· fund
the Local Economic Development broker-led Kai Franklin and Pukekohe Skills Hub
projects, the Te Ara Rangatahi led Mahi Gains (skills development) programme
and the Clevedon Community and Business Association led business development
initiatives
· a
place-based approach to youth engagement and empowerment across
Franklin’s geographically and culturally diverse communities
· continued
contribution to the restoration of Papakura Stream and Manukau Harbour in
partnership with others
· honour
year three Community Partnership funding commitments
· fund
local Coastal Rescue Services and coastal (seasonal) safety messaging
campaigns.
24. The majority of individual respondents support all (38%)
or most (36%) priorities.
25. Ngāti Tamaoho would like a constant focus on our
people and te taiao (environment), enduring long term solutions, and budget
that adds value and impact to the lives of people and the environment.
26. Ngāti Te Ata gave feedback that ‘arts and
culture’ and ‘environment’ especially waterways and planting
are high priorities.
27. Feedback from the Ara Kōtui included:
· initiatives
with direct Māori Outcomes are a priority
· there
is a need for meaningful indicators to measure the effectiveness of initiatives
designed to deliver to Māori Outcomes
· Māori
would like to be involved in the design and delivery of Māori Outcomes
focused initiatives
· that
the board could do more for/prioritise the people who are ahi ka in Pukekohe
· council
processes that group feedback from individual iwi into ‘mana
whenua’ feedback are inappropriate
· to
‘pause’ initiatives with zero budgets and retain line items in work
programme to reinstate when funding allows.
28. Feedback from the Huakina Marae Forum included:
· no
cuts to funding for Māori Outcome initiatives – partnership projects
and initiatives that benefit Māori
· that
the local board consider how to bring Te Tiriti o Waitangi
‘partnership’ to life
· that
the local board consider an equity lens (to achieve positive outcomes for
Māori) when making decisions
· request
that naming, including road naming, be appropriate to the area and the heritage
of the area, and reflect tangata whenua status and te ao Māori values
· an ongoing interest
in being meaningfully involved and included in the responses to the book and
documentary titled ‘No Māori Allowed’
· ongoing regular
engagement from board members with Huakina Marae Forum, including an update on
the Franklin Māori Responsiveness Plan.
Responding
to the budget challenge
29. The
council’s response to mitigate the budget pressures for 2023/2024
includes a proposed reduction of $16 million to local board operational funding
– this would require the Franklin
Local Board to reduce its planned operating spend by $796,000.
30. To do this,
local boards would need to make tough decisions, prioritising what they do and
where they invest. Aucklanders were asked for their
priorities given the proposed reduction would mean some local activities
would have to be discontinued, have reduced spending, or increased fees.
31. The top three priorities to retain funding for were:
· parks, reserves and community facilities maintenance
· environmental restoration and pest control programmes
· protection and restoration of local waterways
32. 
The table below gives an
overview of the responses from the Franklin Local Board area.
Key themes
33. Key themes of note across the feedback received included:
· maintain
environmental initiatives, as pausing these means existing gains will be lost
· now
is the time to pause things that make life nice and only fund necessities and
core council services like parks maintenance
· preference
for initiatives that benefit the whole community rather than selected groups of
people or individuals
· support
for funding that enables communities to help themselves
· support
for initiatives that generate additional funding from elsewhere, and volunteer
hours
· support
for libraries as important community hubs and place of connection for all ages.
34. Franklin Youth Advisory Board consulted with rangatahi to
identify their priorities. Of the 221 rangatahi
who gave feedback on this question, the top priorities were:
· arts and culture programmes (15 per cent selected)
· youth connection programmes (14.5 per cent selected)
· recreation programmes in parks (11.75 per cent selected)
· local climate action and sustainability programmes (9 per
cent).
35. The priorities with least support from youth included:
· discretionary local grants (1 per cent)
· environmental volunteer programmes (1 per cent)
· council-funded community lease maintenance (no response).
Proposal to investigate a targeted rate for a trails network
across Franklin
36. The board asked the community if they support an
investigation into a local targeted rate to fund a network of trails across the
Franklin Local Board area.
37. Of the 862 responses to the proposal, 48 per cent were in support,
41 per cent opposed and 11 per cent responded ‘don’t know’ or
‘other’.
38. A summary of responses from individuals (n=834) and organisations
(n=28) is demonstrated in the graph below:
39. Key themes included:
· trails can generate cycle tourism revenue and create
opportunities for pollution free travel across Franklin
· trails are ‘nice to have’ and council should
focus on core business at this time
· trails should be funded by developers
· would like to see evidence of how proposed projects
positively impact the economic growth and development of local areas and town
centres.
40. Specific requests for local paths included:
· Orere Community and Boating Association – path
between school and village – however do not support targeted rate
· Kawakawa Bay Community Association – path
connecting the two bays.
Information on submitters
41. The tables and graphs below indicate the source of submissions.
42. Most
submissions came from individuals (97 per cent), via online survey (74 per
cent).
43. The graphs below indicate the demographic categories people identified
with. This information only relates to those submitters who provided
demographic information.
Key themes
44. Key themes of note across the feedback received (through
written, in-person and social media channels) included:
· looking
after our environment and waterways is a high priority and core council
function
· environmental
work needs to continue, as if it lapses it will be decades to get it back to
where it is now
· funding
for local community volunteer activities has a ‘multiplier effect’
with the outcomes produced far in excess of what the council provides in
funding
· support
for libraries as places of community connection with free activities for all
ages
· to
‘pause’ some local initiatives and reinstate when financial
position is better
· support
for Waiuku Zero Waste to continue its operations
· rural
halls need financial support from council, particularly to recover from
challenges created by COVID; isolated communities get very little from council
so support for the rural hall is one of the few things they do get locally;
many halls were gifted and/or constructed by local families so there is
sentimental attachment; challenges of rural hall committees preventing more
innovative use.
Feedback on other local topics
45. Comments received on other local topics included:
· council
processes and requirements prevent volunteers from doing things in their local
communities
· funding for local community volunteer activities has a
‘multiplier effect’ with the outcomes produced far in excess of
what the council provides in funding
· for
local businesses and service providers to be used for council maintenance
services, as they charge less and have more accountability
· dissatisfaction
with public transport in Franklin, with need for better connections between
buses and ferries, more frequent buses, and suburb to suburb buses; and
annoyance regarding perceived waste associated with ‘empty’ buses
in Pukekohe, particularly given there are no trains to link to currently.
Requests from local organisations
46. Requests for local funding through the Annual Budget
2023/2024 consultation included:
· Waiuku
Business and Development Association requested community partnership funding to
continue to enable “Waiuku Blast to the Past” and “Waiuku
Steel n Wheels Festival”
· Manukau
Heads Lighthouse Trust requested community partnership funding of $15,000
continue, particularly given lack of road access due to Cyclone Gabrielle has
reduced all supplementary income
· Waiuku
Estuary Restoration Trust suggested that for the 2023/2024 year only they could
accept a one-off reduction in budget from $10,000 down to $5,000; additionally
they can source plants locally for community planting meaning no expenditure
for this
· Bloom
Pukekohe would like to retain the discretionary funding they apply for to
enable them to ensure their purpose-built centre continues to provide
horticultural and crafts activities to the intellectually disabled community
· RSA
Franklin would like previous support for ANZAC and Armistice Day events
reinstated
· Kawakawa
Bay Community Association requested walking/cycling pathway linking bay one and
bay two; measures to address speed including ‘slow’ signs, speed
limit in flashing LED signs x 3, and red road paint; improvements to road
maintenance including addressing drop-outs in a timely manner; planting of bank
along river edge at the back of the Kawakawa Bay Reserve; boat club parking
plan; website for Kawakawa Bay; membership drive to increase numbers.
· Orere
Boating and Community Association requested immediate action to address
collapsing river wall at Orere Point Beach Reserve; remediation of toilet block
at Orere Point Beach Reserve (currently no power, functional ventilation,
flushing system); walkway between village and Orere School; changes to
scheduling cycles for mowing and rubbish bin emptying.
· Ararimu
Residents and Ratepayers – re-introduce targeted rates for community
facilities like halls; would like funding for halls and other assets to be
improved so assets don’t deteriorate and become neglected; let
communities manage their own assets and fund them to do so
· Franklin
Arts Festival Society – continue to provide the annual grant that covers
the cost of hiring the Pukekohe Town Hall (including Concert Chamber) for the
annual art exhibition.
· Pukekohe
Business Association – ongoing concerns about excessive costs associated
with traffic management for events; continued pushback from Auckland Transport
about installation of Flag Trax; for local board funded events, local economic
development, town centre re-generation, community-led activations,
environmental and waste initiatives and events like ANZAC and Matariki
celebrations to be maintained; opposed to reduction of bins in town centres and
reduction in garden maintenance.
· Te
Puru Charitable Trust (an Auckland Council CCO) – requests council to
maintain their current funding levels through the Funding Agreement and
Facility Operating Grant process.
· Ramarama
Residents and Ratepayers Association – dissatisfaction with rural hall
funding received from council
· Friends
of Te Wairoa – retain contestable regional grants for community groups
who provide great value for money for Auckland Council; do not support
prioritisation of one waterway over others
· Manukau
Harbour Restoration Society - sustaining environmental and climate activities
should be top priority for all local boards, along with funding the Manukau
Harbour Forum.
· Clevedon
Community and Business Association – requesting a focus on local Civil
Defence Plans, giving local boards more decision-making over properties in
their local areas (regardless of ‘service’ or
‘non-service’ status); continued funding of local facilities, rural
halls, pest control; regional and local parks
· Franklin
Youth Advisory Board requested ongoing funding to deliver youth engagement and
advisory, recognising that this may need to be spread across the Franklin local
board area.
Other locally specific requests
47. Other requests received through the Annual Budget
2023/2024 consultation included:
· an
indoor centre for sport in Pukekohe
· for
the board to work proactively with Auckland Transport and other CCOs to get
delayed roading and drainage/stormwater maintenance back on track after many
years of neglect
· more
accessibility in new facilities and spaces
· retain
free access to community pools for under 16 year olds, extend to 18 years old
to address the high drowning rate.
Overview of feedback received on regional topics in the Annual
Budget 2023/2024 from the Franklin Local Board area
48. The proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024 sets out Auckland
Council’s priorities and how the Council plans to pay for them.
Consultation on the proposed Annual Budget asked submitters to respond to key
questions on:
a) operating
spending reductions
b) amending Auckland International
Airport Limited (AIAL) shareholding policy
c) managing
rates and debt
d) storm
response
e) local
board priorities (covered in ‘Feedback received on the Franklin
Local Board for 2023/2024’ section above)
f) changes
to other rates, fees and charges.
49. Submitters
were also encouraged to give feedback on any of the other matters included in
the Annual Budget 2023/2024 consultation document.
50. The submissions received from the Franklin Local Board
area on these key issues are summarised below, along with an overview of any
other areas of feedback on regional proposals with a local impact.
Key Question 1: operating
spending reductions
51. Aucklanders were asked for feedback on a proposal to save
$125 million through reductions including:
· maintaining
the current reduced number of public transport services for 2023/2024 to save
$21 million
· reducing
funding to Tātaki Auckland Unlimited to save a further $27.5 million with
effects on service delivery (including economic development and tourism
promotion) and pricing at venues it manages such as Auckland Zoo, Auckland Art
Gallery and stadiums
· reducing
regional services such as community and education programmes, arts and culture
programmes, regional events, economic development and other social services
activities such as homelessness funding, community empowerment and funding for
youth centres to save $20 million
· reducing
local board funded activities across all boards to save $16 million (feedback
received on local impacts of the reduction is outlined in the ‘Feedback
received for the Franklin Local Board for 2023/2024’ section above)
· reducing
contestable grants to save $3 million
· no
longer directly providing early childhood education services to save $1
million.
52.
The table and graph below give an overview of the
responses to this question from the Franklin Local Board area
which includes feedback from 876 individuals, twenty organisations and fifteen
proforma submissions. The majority of respondents support selling all
(30%) or some (34%) of the airport shares, with 23% opposed to any sale.
Key Themes
53. Key themes of note from those who support the
proposed reductions included:
· now
is the time to focus on necessities only – these things are ‘nice
to haves’
· central
government should be responsible for funding social initiatives
· suggestions
for additional savings through reducing staff, salaries, and getting rid of
bureaucracy.
54. Key themes of note from those who do not support some
reductions included:
· keep
funding local and specific to community need
· loss
of Citizens Advice Bureau will impact on libraries who will be left to pick up
and respond to the community need
· concern
about loss of homelessness funding
· need
to consider how not funding community initiatives and other programmes may
create unforeseen issues within communities
· counterproductive
impact of reducing funding to Tātaki Auckland Unlimited which may result
in less visitors, higher venue pricing, negative impacts on business and
potential job cuts and closures
· 15
proforma submissions proposing ‘A Better Budget for Tāmaki Makaurau
Auckland’ which includes retaining the Natural Environment Targeted Rate
and Water Quality Targeted Rate; and borrowing more by amending internal debt
policy.
55. Key themes of note from those who do not support any
reductions and would prefer an increase in rates and/or debt included:
· support
for retaining funding for arts sector; early childhood education funding; zoo,
art gallery and museum funding; and funding for the Citizens Advice Bureau
· concerns
that:
o cuts will impact the
most vulnerable which will create more social problems – equity issue
o loss of vibrancy and
cultural aspects that create community and a ‘world class’ city
o cutting public
transport services is contrary to what council is trying to achieve in terms of
climate change outcomes and reducing car usage
o lack of
evidence-based and economic analysis of impact of proposed budget on current
and future generations
o Council is being too
prudent
· that
the city has just come through years of COVID challenges, and arts and culture
are needed more than ever to support communities and contribute to mental
health
· suggestions
to sell Council golf courses to address the budget deficit.
56. Key themes of note from those with other comments
included the need to:
· consider
other measures outside of those that just reflect a bottom line
· apply
an equity lens.
57. Mana whenua iwi with interests in the Franklin local
board area gave feedback as follows:
|
Specific Response
|
Mana
Whenua Entity
|
|
Proceed with
proposed reductions
|
· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board
|
|
Do not proceed
with some reductions and instead further increase rates and/or debt
|
· Ngaati Whanaunga Incorporated Society
· Ngāti Tamaoho Settlement Trust
· Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty Settlement Trust
· Te Ahiwaru Trust
|
|
Do not proceed
with any reductions and instead increase rates and/or debt
|
|
|
Other
|
· Te Ākitai Waiohua Settlement Trust
· Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated
|
|
I don’t
know
|
|
|
No Specific
Response
|
· Te Ara Rangatū o te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata
– Waiohua
|
58. Ngāti Tamaoho support reductions to funding of
Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU), while ensuring the procurement of
Māori business remains across all of Auckland Council; and that
Tāmaki Herenga Waka Festival continues. Continuing to invest in youth
and intergenerational elements, homelessness, community led solutions and Marae
led recovering are priorities. Support retaining local board funding,
regional contestable grants and early childhood education funding.
59. Te Ākitai Waiohua have concerns about accessibility
for Māori, loss of staff with specific skills and capacity, and potential
detrimental impacts on relationships between iwi and Auckland council.
Their suggestion is to:
· develop
more long term, enduring solutions
· build
on models successfully employed during COVID-19 and use funding to help
Māori to help themselves.
60. Ngaati Whanaunga – support retaining funding for
local boards, regional services and regional contestable grants as these help
people and environment to thrive.
61. Te Ahiwaru – support retaining local board funding;
review, reprioritise and pause regional contestable grants; review regional
services using a diverse panel that includes mana whenua iwi, with potential to
pause pending demand; concerned about loss of the culture of the Auckland
region; apply and increase user pays levies.
62. Auckland wide organisations that wanted their feedback
considered by the Franklin Local Board included:
· Asian
Family Services – opposed to cuts to regional community services
· Beautification
Trust – maintain funding for flood resilience using green infrastructure;
actions that reduce transport emissions
· New
Zealand Cruise Association – opposed to cuts to funding for Tātaki
Auckland Unlimited (TAU)
· Save
Our Venues – opposed to cuts to TAU and regional services, concerned
about impact on live music, music venues, music programmes and music artists,
and wider impact on community well-being through music
· Youthtown
– retain funding for youth related initiatives.
Key Question 2: Amending
Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL) Shareholding Policy
63. Aucklanders were asked about a planned change to the AIAL
Shareholding Policy which will allow the sale of some or all of Auckland
Council’s shares in AIAL. The proposal is to sell all the shareholding
(currently around 18% of shares in Auckland Airport) which would reduce debt by
around $1.9 billion. This is projected to reduce interest costs by $87 million
per year.
64. Other options were considered, including keeping all the
shares or a partial sale. These options would contribute less towards the
budget reduction target and require other actions such as further increasing
rates or debt.
65. The graph below gives an overview of the responses to
this question from the Franklin Local Board area. Of the 866 individual submitters
who responded to this question, 35 per cent support the proposal, 30 per cent
support a partial sale, and 25 per cent would prefer to keep the shares and
further increase rates/debt.
Key themes
66. Key themes of note across the feedback received from
those in support of sale included:
· Good
option in current situation
· Reducing
debt is important.
67. Key themes of note from those in support of a partial
sale included:
· Airport
is a key strategic asset that plays a key role in driving revenue/growth; it is
good to have some control over it
· to
keep shares in ownership of New Zealand citizens
· income
from dividends will return as tourism increases
· proceeds
from a partial sale should be invested in services proposed to be cut such as
the Citizens Advice Bureau.
68. Key themes of note from those not in support of
the sale included:
· selling
shares is short-sighted, once sold the shares are lost forever, with no chance
for future dividends
· shares
were gifted to Manukau City Council and dividends used to fund community
initiatives and reduce rate increases, they did not cost the council anything
to obtain
· not
a good time to sell shares
· suggestions
to sell other council owned assets instead such as golf courses.
69. Mana whenua iwi with interests in the Franklin local
board area gave feedback as follows:
|
Response
|
Mana
Whenua Entity
|
|
Proceed with the
proposal to enable the sale of all our shares in AIAL and use the
proceeds to reduce debt and therefore annual interest costs by around $87
million per year
|
· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board
· Ngāti Tamaoho Settlement Trust
|
|
Enable a partial
sale of our shares, maintaining a 10 per cent shareholding in AIAL
(reducing our interest costs by around $40 million per year), and further
increase rates and/or debt
|
· Ngaati Whanaunga Incorporated Society
· Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty Settlement Trust
· Te Ahiwaru Trust
· Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated
|
|
Don’t
change the policy, keep all our shares, and further increase
rates and/or debt
|
|
|
Other
|
· Te Ākitai Waiohua Settlement Trust
|
|
I don’t
know
|
|
|
No Specific
Response
|
· Te Ara Rangatū o te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata
– Waiohua
|
70. Ngāti Tamaoho – support partial sale of
shares, while also seeing the shares as a stable long-term investment, with
dividends that can support the recovery of the city.
71. Te Ākitai Waiohua – request an evaluation of
the merits of the proposal by widening the lens beyond finance only to also
factor people and environment into the equation, acknowledging that success is
about much more than money.
Key Question 3: Managing rates
and debt
72. Aucklanders were asked to provide feedback on a
proposal of a total rates increase for the average value residential property
of around 4.66 per cent or $154 per year. This would be achieved through:
· an
average increase in general rates of 7 per cent
across all existing properties, including non-residential
· reducing the Natural Environment Targeted Rate (NETR) and
Water Quality Targeted Rate (WQTR) by around two thirds and using the money
already collected from these rates to continue delivering these work programmes
as planned in 2023/2024
· pausing the long-term differential strategy (the split
between business and residential rates) for one year. Under the current policy,
annual increases to general rates for business properties are less than for
non-business properties so that over time the share of general rates paid by business
properties is fairer.
73. Aucklanders
were also asked about the proposal to increase council’s use of debt by
up to $75 million in the 2023/2024 year. The proposal involves using the debt to fund some capital
expenditure that is currently planned to be funded by operating revenue.
74. The graphs below give an overview of the responses to
this question from the Franklin Local Board area.
Key themes
75. Key themes of note across the feedback received from
those in support of the rates proposal included:
· keep rates low as many people are already struggling
financially
· a balanced approach
· many areas in Franklin receive very little from council
for the rates they pay
· perceived inefficiency and ineffectiveness in services
council does provide
· keep debt to a minimum
76. Key themes of note from those in support of a higher
rates increase included:
· rates should at least be at level of inflation
· concern about impact of increased debt, and shifting
costs onto future generations
77. Key themes of note from those in support a lower
general rates and greater use of debt included:
· Council debt is currently below acceptable limits
· Council should make strategic use of debt and apply a
more long term approach
· during this time of temporary economic crises, use of
more debt with lower rates is a better balance for those struggling with the
cost of living.
78. Other comments included:
· concern
that the Natural Environment and Water Quality Targeted Rates once suspended
might not be reinstated, and that the work they fund is vital to maintain
· Pukekohe
Business Association does not support pausing the long-term differential
strategy.
79. Mana whenua iwi with interests in the Franklin local
board area gave feedback as follows:
|
Response
|
Mana
Whenua Entity
|
|
Proceed with the
proposed increases to rates (4.66 per cent overall for the average value
residential property) and debt (up to $75 million of additional debt)
|
· Ngaati Whanaunga Incorporated Society
· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board
· Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty
Settlement Trust
· Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated
|
|
Set higher
general rates increase
|
|
|
Make greater
use of debt
|
|
|
Set lower general
rates increase and make greater use of debt
|
· Te Ahiwaru Trust
|
|
Make less
use of debt and set higher general rates increase
|
· Ngāti Tamaoho Settlement Trust
|
|
Other
|
· Te Ākitai Waiohua
Settlement Trust
|
|
I don’t
know
|
|
|
No Specific
Response
|
· Te Ara Rangatū o te Iwi o Ngāti
Te Ata – Waiohua
|
80. Ngāti Tamaoho – support lower general rates
and greater use of debt; that a cap be set for any increases once debt is under
control; need to decrease the stress caused by cumulative ‘tax’
increases to individuals and whanau, including a strategy from council to
support those that can’t afford proposed rates increases.
81. Ngaati Whanaunga – there is a need to accommodate
the needs of families that are already struggling financially.
82. Te Ahiwaru Trust and Ngaati
Whanaunga Incorporated Society suggested that the Auckland Council should be
reviewed by external auditors to provide an independent view on Auckland
Council effectiveness and efficiency
Key Question 4: Storm response
83. Aucklanders were asked about a proposal to
increase council’s operating budgets by around $20 million each year to
improve the ability to prepare for and respond to future storms. This would
likely require rates to increase for 2023/2024 by around an additional 1 per
cent (on top of the 4.66 per cent increase proposed to address the budget
shortfall).
84. The graphs below give an overview of the responses to
this question from the Franklin Local Board area.
Key themes
85. Key themes of note across the feedback received included:
· support for intent of the storm response fund, but not
the additional 1 per cent rate to fund it
· storm response should be a central government function
· lack of information about what the fund will actually
cover in reality
· $20 million will be insufficient and there is a need for
more longer term thinking
· time to address decades of underspend on infrastructure
· concern about lack of ownership of flooding risk with
core functions such as keeping drains clear and maintaining stormwater falling
between several agencies and sometimes a void between agencies, with annual
drain maintenance hopelessly inadequate and short-sighted
· Council needs to make changes including stopping all development on land that has the potential to flood;
considering impact of ‘upstream’ developments on other areas; for
infrastructure to be resilient and able to deal with extreme weather and
impacts of climate change.
86. Mana whenua iwi with interests in the Franklin local
board area gave feedback as follows:
|
Response
|
Mana
Whenua Entity
|
|
Proceed with the
proposal to increase our operating budget by around $20 million each year
|
· Ngaati Whanaunga Incorporated
Society
· Ngāti Pāoa Trust Board
· Ngāti Tamaoho Settlement Trust
· Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty
Settlement Trust
· Te Ahiwaru Trust
· Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated
|
|
Do not proceed
with the proposal
|
|
|
Other
|
· Te Ākitai Waiohua
Settlement Trust
|
|
Don’t know
|
|
|
No Specific
Response
|
· Te Ara Rangatū o te Iwi o Ngāti
Te Ata – Waiohua
|
87. Ngāti Tamaoho would prefer Marae to be funded to
provide community led initiatives to support the community as they have
intimate knowledge of the needs of communities and have provided ample evidence
that they can meet those needs.
88. Ngaati Whanaunga submitted there is a need to work
closely with iwi and local communities to find long-term solutions, and to
proactively address stormwater requirements.
Key Question 5: local board
priorities
89. Aucklanders
were asked for feedback on the local impacts of the Annual Budget, feedback
received on this is outlined in the ‘Feedback received for the Franklin Local Board for
2023/2024’ section above.
Key Question 6: changes to
other rates, fees and charges
90. Aucklanders were asked for feedback on proposals
to increase some targeted rates and other
regulatory fees and charges as set out below. If the changes are not
made, then general rates may need to be higher than proposed.
91. The tables below gives a summary of responses:
Waste management rates changes
92. A 10.6 per cent increase to the base rate and targeted rate
charges for non-standard refuse bins (in the former Auckland (ACC) and Manukau
(MCC) city council areas)
– majority in support (n=415).
93. Introduction of a fee for swapping bin sizes –
majority in support (n=562)
· two
submitters suggested fee should only be for increasing the bin size, to
incentivise people to have a smaller bin and produce less waste
94. Extension of the food scraps targeted rate to the new
areas that will receive the service this year – majority support
(n=450). Of those not in support (n=268), comments included:
· people do their own compost and do not want this service
· concern about negative impacts of driving food waste to
processing facilities, and collecting all the bins
· one person suggested a cost per pick up approach.
95. Ngāti Tamaoho would prefer investment in-home
composting systems and mara kai (community gardens) as people directly benefit
from these, and they are a long-term approach.
Changes to other rates, fees
and charges
96. Re-prioritisation of additional bus service expenditure
which was planned to be funded by the Climate Action Targeted Rate (CATR) for
the 2023/2024 year – majority support (n=368). Pukekohe Business
Association requested the on-demand public transport service for Pukekohe be
funded through the CATR.
97. Swimming Pool/Spa Pool Fencing Compliance Targeted Rate:
increases to reflect the actual costs of the service, and an increase in the
fee for follow up inspections – majority support (n=467).
98. Amendment to Community Occupancy Guidelines were
generally not supported and that ‘one size fits all’ approach to
fees is unrealistic. Feedback themes, and submissions from local and
regional organisations were as follows:
· a ‘one size fits all’ approach to fees is
unrealistic – fees/charges need to reflect that some clubs receive more
council benefits than others
· charge
fees to commercial leases, but not community; funds spent on lease fees means
less to spend on delivering for the community
· any
group that has an exclusive use of an Auckland Council facility should have to
pay the full cost of that facility if they are to have use of it – full
costs being rates, maintenance, water, power and grounds (this includes rural
libraries)
· Plunket - opposed - potential costs would impact on
ability to provide services, limited government funding
· Pukekohe Netball Club – opposed - any increase in
costs to a sporting body will have to be passed on. This will drive poor
community outcomes and less well-being for families
· RSA
Franklin – opposed, proposed fees would put major financial strain onto
the organisation and impact on ability to deliver for the community.
Historically, RSA members contributed financially to the RSA building and
Pukekohe War Memorial Hall
· Te Puru Sea Scouts - not opposed to being responsible for maintenance, however
this should be through doing maintenance rather than council collecting fees to
do so
· Ararimu Residents and Ratepayers –
opposed to council passing on costs to voluntary community organisation (eg
lease preparation).
99. There was no local feedback on other changes in the
proposal including changes to the Rodney Drainage District Targeted Rate;
establishment of a Business Improvement District (BID) and BID targeted rate
for Silverdale; animal management fees; building and resource consenting fees;
regulatory fees such as food licensing registration, micro-mobility operator
fees and swimming pool inspections; cemetery fees.
100. In relation to the review of fees for bookable spaces in
council managed pool and leisure facilities, a submission was received from CLM
Sport in opposition, however the proposed changes do not impact the Franklin
Local Board area.
Other
matters for feedback
101. Aucklanders were asked
to feedback on the Tūpuna Maunga Authority Operational Plan 2023/2024
which sets out a framework in which the council must carry out the routine
management of 14 Tūpuna Maunga.
102. Of the seventeen
submitters who make comments, four were in support of the plan and eight were
opposed.
103. Other comments included:
· need
more detailed informed on what the Tūpuna Maunga Authority plans to do
· budget
needs to be reviewed to bring it more in line with budgets for other parks and
reserves
· dissatisfaction
with actions such as removal of exotic heritage trees.
104. Mana whenua iwi with interests in the Franklin Local
Board area gave additional general feedback as follows.
Ngaati Whanaunga:
· request to reconfigure the mana whenua funding model to
place a focus on engaging mana whenua to invest in their communities and
environment where they need it most
· to look past the budget decision figures to remember the
importance of enhancing the wellbeing of people and the environment
· request to work with them to enhance Māori economic development,
sustainable growth planning on Māori land, and for Māori communities.
Te Akitai Waiohua:
· Te Tiriti o Waitangi, equity and holistic principles need
to be fundamental to all decision-making
· more effort is needed to consider alternatives that
better reflect needs of people and the environment, and addresses equity.
Annual Budget 2023/2024 related policies
The following proposals were
consulted on alongside the Annual Budget:
Revenue and Financing Policy
105. The proposal to pause
the Long-Term Differential Strategy (LTDS) for one year would require an
amendment to the Revenue and Financing Policy.
106. Under
the current rating policy, businesses pay a greater share of rates than
non-business properties. Businesses make more use of council services like
transport and stormwater. They also place more demand on these services.
Council previously decided that the level of business rates is too high and
should be reduced gradually over time. The LTDS currently lowers the total
amount of general rates (UAGC and value-based general rate) for businesses in
equal steps, from 31 per cent in 2022/2023 to 25.8 per cent by 2037/2038.
Feedback
107. 146 submissions were
received on the proposal. Of these, 99 supported the proposal and 41 did not
support the proposal. A further six either provided another response or did not
know. Comments from those in support included businesses being able to afford the
increase and the impact of rates on residential ratepayers.
108. Responses from those who
did not support the proposal included the view that business rates are too
high.
109. Eight of the 146
responses were from people who identified as Māori with four in support of
the proposal, three not in support and one who did not know.
110. The Property Council did
not support the proposal citing concern for increased costs on businesses and
business rates being too high.
Māori Land Rates Remission
and Postponement Policy
111. The Council is proposing
to amend the Māori Land Rates Remission and Postponement Policy to provide
a partial remission of rates to general title papakāinga, where that land
is:
a) protected from being
sold out of Māori ownership
b) for the sole use of
hapū/iwi (tribe).
112. This recognises the
similarities between these properties and papakāinga on Māori
freehold land. The proposed remission would apply a discount of up to 10 per
cent of the rateable land value. This is similar to what is applied to
Māori freehold land.
Feedback
113. There were 40
submissions from individuals. Of these 20 were in support of the proposal and
20 did not support the proposal. Responses in support included the positive
benefits to Māori in retaining land. Responses from those who did not
support included Māori not having special treatment, and concern about the
costs to other Aucklanders.
114. Eight of the 40
responses were from individuals who identified as Māori, all of whom
supported the proposal. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei also submitted
in support of the proposal.
Local board advocacy
115. Local boards can also provide approved advocacy
initiatives which considers the consultation feedback above. This allows the
Governing Body to consider these advocacy items when making decisions on the
Annual Budget 2023/2024 to the Governing Body in June.
116. The advocacy initiatives approved by the local board will
be included as an appendix to the 2023/2024 Local Board Agreement
Local board input on regional topics in the Annual Budget
2023/2024
117. Local boards have a statutory responsibility for identifying
and communicating the interests and preferences of the people in its local
board area in relation to Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans,
and bylaws, and any proposed changes to be made to them. This report
provides an opportunity for the local board to provide input on the
council’s proposed Annual Budget 2023/2024, proposed changes to
the Revenue and Financing Policy and Māori Land Rates Remission and
Postponement Policy.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
118. The
decisions recommended in this report are part of the Annual Budget 2023/2024
and local board agreement process to approve funding and expenditure over the
next year.
119. Projects
allocated funding or proposed to have reduced funding through this Annual
Budget process will all have varying levels of potential climate impact
associated with them. The climate impacts of projects Auckland Council chooses
to progress, are all assessed carefully as part of the council’s rigorous
reporting requirements.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
120. The Annual Budget 2023/2024 is an Auckland Council Group
document and will include budgets at a consolidated group level. Consultation
items and updates to budgets to reflect decisions and new information may
include items from across the group.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
121. The
local board’s decisions and feedback are being sought in this report. The
local board has a statutory role in providing its feedback on regional plans
and policies.
122. Local
boards play an important role in the development of the council’s Annual
Budget. Local board agreements form part of the Annual Budget. Local board
nominees have also attended Governing Body workshops on the Annual Budget.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
123. Many local board decisions are of importance to and
impact on Māori. Local board agreements and the Annual Budget are important
tools that enable and can demonstrate the council’s responsiveness to
Māori.
124. Local board plans, developed in 2020 through engagement
with the community including Māori, form the basis of local board area
priorities. There is a need to continue to build relationships between local
boards and iwi, and the wider Māori community.
125. Ongoing conversations between local boards and Māori
will assist in understanding each other’s priorities and issues. This in
turn can influence and encourage Māori participation in the
council’s decision-making processes.
126. Some projects approved for funding could have discernible
impacts on Māori. The potential impacts on Māori, as part of any
project progressed by Auckland Council, will be assessed appropriately and
accordingly as part of relevant reporting requirements.
127. The Annual Budget 2023/2024 and related policies includes
a proposed amendment to the Māori Land
Rates Remission and Postponement Policy covered in the ‘Annual Budget related policies’ section above.
128. Ngā Mātārae led the Council-wide approach
to engagement with Māori entities. This included:
· preliminary email to mana whenua iwi and mataawaka organisations
providing information about the upcoming budget
· briefing workshops led by technical leads to clarify the proposal
and answer preliminary questions. This included two workshops for mana
whenua, and two for mataawaka organisations, both occurring prior to the public
consultation period
· one-on-one workshops
· technical support provided for those who needed help preparing their
oral and/or written submissions was provided through a consultant
· oral submissions from mana whenua were presented to the Governing
Body Have Your Say event on 24th March 2023.
129. 13 of the 19 (68
[per cent) mana whenua entities responded to the Auckland Council’s
proposals for the Annual Budget 2023/2024. Out of a total of 93,925 people who
affiliate to mana whenua entities in the Auckland Region, 69,662 (74 per cent)
people are represented by the feedback received.
130. Mana whenua
feedback comprised eleven oral submissions to the Governing Body, and thirteen
written submissions.
131. Six mana whenua
entities and eight mataawaka organisations provided informal feedback received during
the briefing workshops and one-on-one workshops.
132. Franklin Local Board engaged locally with Māori
through:
· an Ara Kōtui hui focussed on the Annual Budget
(combined with the other southern local boards and iwi mana whenua hui)
· attending a hui of the Huakina Marae Forum.
133. Ninety submissions from people who identify as Māori
were received from people residing in the Franklin Local Board area. This
represents 10% of total submissions.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
134. This report is seeking the local board’s decisions
on financial matters in the local board agreement that must then be considered
by the Governing Body.
135. The local board also provides input to regional plans and
policies. There is information in the council’s consultation material for
each proposal with the financial implications of each option outlined for
consideration.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
136. The council must adopt its Annual Budget, which includes
local board agreements, by 30 June 2023. In order to meet this timeframe, the
local board is required to make recommendations on these local matters for the
Annual Budget by mid May 2023 and present to the Governing Body to make
decisions on key items to be included in the Annual Budget on 8 June 2023.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
137. The local board will approve its Local Board Agreement in
June 2023 and corresponding work programmes in July 2023.
138. Recommendations and feedback from the local board will be
provided to the Governing Body for consideration in its decision-making.
139. The final Annual Budget 2023/2024 (including local board
agreements) will be adopted by the Governing Body on 29 June 2023.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Franklin Local Board consultation feedback and input
into the Annual Budget 2023/2024
|
37
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Lucy Stallworthy - Local Board Engagement Advisor
|
|
Authorisers
|
Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services
Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin
Manurewa Papakura
|
|
Franklin Local
Board
09 May 2023
|
|
Local Board views on Notice of
Requirement for a Counties Energy substation at 13 Nola Ave, Glenbrook
File No.: CP2023/04610
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
invite the Franklin Local Board’s views on a Notice of Requirement lodged
by Counties Energy Limited for a new electricity substation at 13 Nola Avenue,
Glenbrook.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Decision-makers
on a Notice of Requirement (NoR) to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) must
consider local boards’ views on the NoR, if the relevant local boards
choose to provide their views.
3. Each
local board has a responsibility to communicate the interests and preferences
of people in its area on Auckland Council policy documents, including NoRs. A
local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole
local board.
4. Counties
Energy, as the requiring authority, has served a NoR on Auckland Council for a
designation for a new substation at 13 Nola Avenue, Glenbrook (LOT 5000 DP
562266, ½ SH LOT 2003 DP62266). The property is zoned Residential
– Single House Zone and is within the Glenbrook 3 Precinct. The land area
requirement to be designated is 3358m2. This is located within a larger site
(34.4728 hectares).
5. The
purpose of the designation is for “electricity supply purposes”. A
10 year lapse period is sought.
6. The
NoR was limited notified on 9 December 2022 and submissions closed on 27
February 2023.
7. A
total of five submissions were received on the NoR.
8. The
key themes arising from submissions include:
· visual
effects resultant from the facility, effectiveness of proposed
planting/screening
· acoustic
effects from the facility, effectiveness of acoustic screening
· health
and safety effects – concerns about electromagnetic fields
· effects
on property values.
9. A
local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole
local board. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and
provide its views on the NoR. Staff do not recommend a view the local board
should convey as they will be reporting to the independent hearings panel
appointed by the council to hear submissions and make recommendations to
Counties Energy Limited on the NoR.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Franklin Local Board:
a) provide
local board views on the Notice of Requirement for a new substation at 13 Nola
Avenue, Glenbrook
b) appoint
a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing (if one is
held) on the Notice of Requirement
c) delegate
authority to the chairperson of Franklin Local Board to make a replacement
appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is
unable to attend the Notice of Requirement hearing.
Horopaki
Context
10. Each local
board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people
in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies,
policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of
these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when
deciding the content of these policy documents.
11. The NoR is
intended to add a new designation to the AUP. Local boards must have the
opportunity to provide their views where any process proposes a change to the
AUP.
12. If the local
board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the
section 42a hearing report. Local board views are included in the analysis of
the NoR, along with all submissions.
13. If appointed
by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at
the hearing to commissioners, who will make a recommendation on the NoR.
14. Following
receipt of the recommendation, the Requiring Authority (Counties Energy) would
be required to advise the council, within 30 working days, whether they accept
or reject the recommendation in whole or in part.
15. Once the
council has received a decision from the Requiring Authority, submitters will
be advised and are then given an opportunity to lodge an appeal with the
Environment Court if they are not satisfied with the outcome. Auckland Council
will also have the opportunity at this stage to appeal the decision.
16. This report
provides an overview of the NoR and a summary of the key themes in submissions.
The complete suite of NoR documents can be viewed here: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=162
17. The report
does not recommend what views the local board should convey. Staff cannot
advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those
views.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
Notice of requirement overview, site and locality
18. Counties
Energy served a notice of requirement on 21 September 2022 for a designation
for a new substation – 13 Nola Avenue, Glenbrook. The purpose of the
designation is for “electricity supply purposes”.
19. Counties
Energy served a notice of requirement on 21 September 2022 for a designation
for a new substation – 13 Nola Avenue, Glenbrook. The purpose of the
designation is for ‘electricity supply purposes’.
20. A 10 year
lapse date is being sought by Counties Energy.
21. Counties
Energy advises it requires the designation in order to construct, operate and
maintain a new 33kV zone substation, which is said to be needed to ensure it
can meet future local electricity demands.
22. The site is
13 Nola Avenue, Glenbrook (LOT 5000 DP 562266, ½ SH LOT 2003 DP62266)
and is zoned Residential – Single House Zone and is within the Glenbrook
3 Precinct. The land area requirement to be designated is 3358m2. This is
located within a larger site (34.4728 hectares). Figures 1 and 2 which follow
show broader location of the site and the portion of the subject site for which
a designation is being sought. The proposal is described in more detail in
Appendix A.
23. Counties
Energy has provided a description of the subject site and surrounds (which
council staff agree with) and note that:
· The
land subject to land requirement is currently part of a larger parcel. This
land parcel is undergoing the process of obtaining subdivision consent for 54
separate lots. The surrounding environment in undergoing urbanisation, with
sites to the north comprising of single storey dwellings, zoned Single House
Zone.
· The
irregularly shaped land subject to land requirement is approximately 50m south
of the intersection of McLarin Road and Orawahi Road.
· The
site is relatively flat and is surrounded by dense riparian vegetation.
· The
site access is via a shared driveway onto McLarin Road.
· A
small portion of land to the south is zoned Business – Local Centre zone,
but the majority of the land to the south and to the west remains rural in
character and is zoned either Future Urban Zone or Mixed Rural Zone.
Figure 1: Location of the subject site (highlighted in teal) and
wider zoning context
*24. A map showing
the location of 13 Nola Avenue is shown in Figure 2, showing the 3358m2
area to be designated.
Figure 2: Appendix A of NoR: Land Area Requirement
25. Counties
Energy advises it requires the designation to construct, operate and maintain a
new 33kV zone substation needed to meet the future demand for electricity that
is anticipated in the area. The detailed design of the substation will be
determined at a later stage through an outline plan of works. The
Infrastructure Design Report (Appendix C of the NoR) states the proposed works
will include:
· Approximately
700m3 of earthworks over an area of approximately 900m2, predominantly to form
a platform for the substation, excavation for the building basement and
transformer bays
· Construction
of concrete foundation pads, bunds and firewalls for the outdoor 33/11kV
transformers.
· Construction
of a 140m2 33/11kV switchroom building.
· Civil
site works such as earthworks, stormwater drainage, wastewater drainage,
carparks and driveways.
26. Counties
Energy has provided a concept plan to show a possible layout of the facilities
and the overall site plan. Figure 3 below shows the proposed substation plan. Other
concept imagery from Counties Energy provides a visual indication of the nature
and scale of the substation proposed – as shown in Attachment A.
Figure 3: Concept site plan - Proposed substation plan
27. A set of
conditions are proposed with the NoR (Appendix I of the NoR). It is noted the
requirement for an outline plan is included in the proposed conditions.
Section 92 further information request
28. A section 92
request for further information was sent to Counties Energy on 20 September
2022 Their response was received on 31 October 2022.
29. The section
92 request asked for further information in relation to various matters
including adverse effects, potential mitigation measures including conditions.
In summary the section 92 relates to the following matters:
· Construction
· Potentially
affected persons
· Covenant
on record of title
· Alternative
considered
· Permitted
baseline
· Assessment
against specific RPS provisions
· Landscape
and visual amenity
· Groundwater
· Hazardous
substances
· Erosion
and sediment control
· Mana
whenua
30. In response
to the section 92 Counties Energy revised the lodged conditions and provided
further information.
Extended Notification
31. Staff acting
under delegated authority from the Governing Body determined that the NoR was
to be processed without full public notification as the adverse effects were
considered minor, with mitigaton proposed and no special circumstances
applied. If the NoR is not publicly notified, the council must decide if
there are any adversely affected persons, or customary rights or title groups.
The NoR was limited notified on 9 December 2022 and submissions were originally
intended to close on 30 January 2023. The persons associated with the
properties in Figure 4 below were considered to be adversely affected and were
therefore notified.
Figure 4: Map of locations (in yellow) of the adjacent
properties (owners/occupiers) included in the limited notification.
32. During
the submission period it was found that a notified site had undergone
subdivision since the notification date of 9 December 2022. Due to the
subdivision of land during the submission period and the subsequent purchase of
newly created titles, new owners of these subdivisions were considered
‘successors’ to the previous landowner under section 2A of the
Resource Management Act 1991 and needed to be included in the notification
process.
33. An
extension of time under s37 of the Resource Management Act 1991 was sought to
enable these people to fairly participate in the statutory process. The time
period for lodging of submissions was extended from 30 January 2023 to 27
February 2023 to allow for the council to notify the new owners and occupiers
and allow them to submit if they wished.
Figure 5: Location of newly subdivided
sites in yellow, which previously were part of an originally single notified
property.
Submissions received
34. A total of
five submissions were received on the NoR, as summarised in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Submissions received
on NoR
|
Submissions
|
Support/Oppose
|
|
Oppose
|
5
|
35. No
submissions were received from mana whenua organisations. Mana whenua
organisations (Ngati Tamaho Trust and Ngati Te Ata Waiohua) were served notice
of the NoR when it was limited notified. Individual submissions can be made
available to the local board upon request.
36. Key
submission themes are listed below.
Effects on visual amenity and effectiveness of proposed
mitigation
37. Concerns were
raised by submitters about the effectiveness of planting / the visual screening
proposed.
38. To reduce
effects on visual amenity, some submitters are seeking additional or enhanced
mitigation measures such as early planting of vegetation at the boundary to
ensure vegetation is at a reasonable height for screening when construction
begins.
Noise effects
39. Several
submitters are concerned about acoustic effects and the mitigation measures
proposed. Submitters have suggested enhanced mitigation such as suggested
acoustic fencing or roofing.
Electromagnetic effects
40. One submitter
is concerned about the effects of electric magnetic fields (EMFs).
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
Context
41. The
council’s climate goals as set out in Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri:
Auckland’s Climate Plan are:
· to
adapt to the impacts of climate change by planning for the changes we will face
(climate adaptation)
· to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve net zero
emissions by 2050 (climate mitigation)
42. The first of
council’s climate goals is relevant because it relates to climate
adaption. That goal aligns with the legal principle for RMA decision-makers to
have particular regard to the effects of climate change (section 7(i) RMA).
43. However, the
RMA currently precludes the second goal: consideration of climate mitigation. Consequently
any local board views on climate mitigation will be disregarded by the plan
change decision-makers.
Implications for local board
views
44. Table 2
provides guidance as to what the local board may wish to consider in forming
any view. It is noted that the site is not susceptible to coastal inundation
nor does the Council mapping indicate it is within a flood plain.
Table 2: Relevance of climate
change to RMA decision-making
|
In scope for RMA
decision-making
|
Out of scope for RMA
decision-making
|
|
a)
Climate adaption issues such
as:
b)
How should land be allocated
to different activities when considering how climate change may affect our
environment? How and where should physical resources be constructed?
For example:
· will sea-level rise cause inundation of land
where development is proposed?
· is the land in an area susceptible to
coastal instability or
erosion?
· will Auckland be less- or better-prepared for
flooding, stress on infrastructure, coastal and storm inundation?
· is ecosystem resilience improved through
ecological restoration or reduced by the loss of indigenous habitats?
|
Climate
mitigation issues such as:
· release of greenhouse gas emissions into the
atmosphere
· increase in tail-pipe emissions from private car use,
use of coal fired or natural gas burners
|
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
45. Auckland
Transport provided advice to Plans and Places staff during the notification
assessment of the NoR. Their initial advice said that the effects on the
transport network of the development enabled by the designation will be less
than minor and does not consider itself an affected party. AT would support the
inclusion of a condition requiring a construction traffic management plan
(CTMP).
46. Auckland
Transport has not submitted on the NoR.
47. Healthy
Waters also provided initial advice to Plans and Places during the notification
assessment of the NoR. Healthy Waters did not raise any significant issues with
the NoR at that time.
48. Further
advice will be sought from Healthy Waters in relation to the submissions and
consideration of the NoR and will inform the recommendations made in the
planner’s section 42A report.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
49. The Notice of
Requirement falls within the Franklin Local Board area.
50. Factors the
local board may wish to consider in formulating its view include:
· local
board documents, such as local board plan, local board agreement
· responsibilities
and operation of the local board
· interests
and preferences of people in local board area
· well-being
of communities within the local board area.
51. Counties
Energy has not advised whether it has consulted with the local board on this
NoR.
52. This report
is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker
will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the NoR.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
53. If the local
board chooses to provide its views on the NoR, this includes the opportunity to
comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori,
well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori world
view). In the 2018 census results 11,247 residents in the Franklin local board
area identify as Māori.
54. The NoR
states that Counties Energy consulted with Ngāti Tamaoho and Ngāti Te
Ata prior to lodging the NoR and intends to continue consultation with these
iwi throughout the design stage and subsequent construction process before
undertaking any work.
55. The NoR
includes a Cultural Impact Assessment report from Ngāti Te Ata, which
contains recommendations. It concludes that overall the substation will not
adversely impact cultural heritage values.
56. Iwi
authorities were provided direct notice of the NoR upon notification, including
Ngāti Te Ata and Ngāti Tamaoho.
57. The hearing
report will include analysis of Part 2 of the RMA which requires that all
persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the
Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
58. There are no
financial implications with the local board providing its views.
59. The local
board is not exposed to any financial risk from providing its views.
60. The cost associated
with processing the NoR requests is recoverable from Counties Energy.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
61. The power to
provide local board views regarding the content of an NoR cannot be delegated
to individual local board member(s). To avoid the procedural risk of an
individual local board member expressing the views of the local board, this
report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views
and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
62. The planner
will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing
report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s
views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that
purpose.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a⇩
|
Counties Energy Sub-station - Concept Imagery
|
53
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Joe McDougall - Planner
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places
Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin
Manurewa Papakura
|
