Agenda of Franklin Local Board - Tuesday, 27 June 2023

1 Nau mai | Welcome

The meeting will open with karakia and the Chair will welcome everyone present.

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

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

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

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

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 20 June 2023 as true and correct.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

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

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

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

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

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

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations

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

8.1 Deputation - Beachlands skate park

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Adela Saville from Beachlands will be in attendance.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Adela Saville will be addressing the board on the need for a new skate park in Beachlands.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) thank Adela Saville from Beachlands for her attendance and presentation on the need for a new skate park in Beachlands.

9 Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum

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

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

10 Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Franklin Local Board

27 June 2023

Unlock Pukekohe: Town Centre Supporting Masterplan and Spatial Delivery Plan FY24-26

File No.: CP2023/07563

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To endorse the updated Unlock Pukekohe Supporting Masterplan and the Unlock Pukekohe Spatial Delivery Plan FY24-FY26.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Unlock Pukekohe High Level Project Plan (HLPP) was endorsed by the Franklin Local Board in April 2019 and approved by the Planning Committee in May 2019. The Finance and Performance Committee subsequently approved the divestment of properties located within the Unlock Pukekohe HLPP boundary in June 2019 for urban renewal purposes.

3. The Unlock Pukekohe Supporting Masterplan was developed and discussed with the Franklin Local Board throughout 2022, which was completed.

4. Eke Panuku worked with the community and stakeholders on project trials in 2021. The update proposed for the Unlock Pukekohe Masterplan was to respond to the outcomes of these trials and to integrate the lessons learned.

5. In August 2022, additionally to the trials, Eke Panuku undertook a robust community engagement process to raise awareness within the Pukekohe community about the Masterplan and seek local input and feedback to inform the plans.

6. Eke Panuku received:

· 147 pieces of written feedback from the community and organisations such as Pukekohe Business Association, Pukekohe High School and Waka Kotahi

· 750 pieces of social media feedback and over 30,000 views of the proposal video online.

7. Input and feedback helped to shape the updated Unlock Pukekohe Supporting Masterplan, included as attachment A to this report.

8. Following the consultation Eke Panuku prepared an updated masterplan with development-based site sales, public works projects, and placemaking programme.

9. Following the Auckland Council budget challenges in early 2023, Eke Panuku made further changes to the masterplan. This report seeks local board endorsement of the updated Supporting Masterplan and Spatial Delivery Plan FY24-FY26.

10. The Supporting Masterplan is a document for the public which sets out the long-term regeneration vision for Pukekohe town centre. The Spatial Delivery Plan is an Eke Panuku visual overview of the Unlock Pukekohe programme based on Programme Business Cases. The Spatial Delivery Plan contains nine public realm projects focused on the town centre area, 10 site sales in the immediate centre and wider urban area, and placemaking/activation initiatives including Small T projects.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) endorse the Unlock Pukekohe Supporting Masterplan (Attachment A).

b) endorse the updated Unlock Pukekohe Spatial Delivery Plan FY24-FY26 (Attachment B).

c) note the previous Spatial Delivery Plan iterations (Attachment C).

d) note the Masterplan Summary document (Attachment D).

Horopaki

Context

11. Pukekohe town centre has been identified as a regeneration and intensification opportunity for Auckland. It is one of the ‘Unlock’ priority locations to be delivered by Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku). The town centre occupies strategic locations with good infrastructure, services, and facilities. The programme area has a concentration of council landholdings that are development ready. The detail of the Pukekohe HLPP was first presented to the local board at a workshop in 2018.

12. Eke Panuku has progressed with some projects under the Unlock Pukekohe programme, those include:

· Innovating Streets trials on Devon Lane and King Street

· Placemaking programme initiatives

· Market Trials

· Parklets on Edinburgh Street and the Town Square.

13. In February 2021 Eke Panuku presented the first iteration of the masterplan for Pukekohe to the local board at a workshop ahead of seeking community feedback. Staff also indicated that they wanted to consult with the community on several items.

14. Upon conclusion of the project’s trials, Eke Panuku amended the masterplan in response to community and stakeholders’ feedback as well as from lessons learnt from the projects trials. In March 2022 Eke Panuku presented the updated masterplan to the local board.

15. The changes proposed to the masterplan included:

· refocusing investment around the Edinburgh Street Superblock and Town Square

· smaller investment and scale of projects as distance increases from this area

· lighter touch to King Street and Town Centre through the Small T programme

· removal of four projects:

o Laneway Upgrades to Devon Lane West: The trial project is proposed to remain in place through a pathway to permanence design process. Therefore, an additional project was no longer required.

o Acquisition of a property on King Street to connect through to the Edinburgh Street Superblock: This was removed due to outcomes of the Urban Renewal report and budget constraints. However, it could be revisited in the future once the Edinburgh Street Superblock is complete.

o East Street Phase 2 (King Street project): This project was removed from the programme due to an overwhelming negative response from the one-way trial and lack of desire from King Street shop owners for increased footpaths and outdoor dining opportunities.

o Urban Tree Programme: This project was removed with additional tree planting to be included in the Small T programme and individual project briefs.

· Addition of five projects:

o New Community and Market Hall at 1 Roulston Street

o Devon Lane East: Upgrades to Devon Lane adjacent to the Edinburgh Street Superblock Site to compliment new development on the site and allow for safe pedestrian movement through the town centre.

o Roulston Lane Upgrade: Adjacent to the 7 Massey Ave development site to compliment new development on the site and allow for safe pedestrian movement through the town centre.

o Hall Street Footbridge: New pedestrian footbridge to connect King Street to the upgraded Roulston Park.

o Edinburgh Street Cycleway: New cycleway proposed to Edinburgh Street between Harris Street and King Street to allow for a safe, separated cycleway connecting the schools to the town centre.

16. Following feedback from the council group and the local board, the Edinburgh Street cycleway project was removed from the proposed masterplan.

17. Auckland Council Community Facilities staff confirmed that the proposed Market Hall at 1 Roulston Street would not be accepted by the council as a new community facility.

18. The proposed masterplan consisting of 10 public realm upgrade projects was agreed to move forward to community consultation with the Franklin Local Board.

19. In August 2022 Eke Panuku started community consultation on this plan. A total of 147 people engaged in the consultation events and provided feedback on the proposed projects. Additionally, written feedback was received from the Pukekohe Business Association, Waka Kotahi and Pukekohe High School.

20. Seven themes were identified for community feedback in the Engagement Plan and the next section provides a summary of the key feedback threads relating to each theme. Feedback from written submissions and face-to-face engagement was also included and summarised where relevant to these themes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. A strong and consistent desire to preserve the “unique character” of Pukekohe came through the feedback. Although there were many different ideas about what the “unique character of Pukekohe” means, they generally fall into two groups - those people who see Pukekohe as a rural / service hub and those who see it as their local town centre.

22. Feedback received from people who see Pukekohe as a rural hub:

· Their priority is to consider people visiting from the wider area and provide for larger vehicles that come off farms such as utes and trucks

· They see the town centre in practical terms - they go there to get specific things done and want the process to be as quick and easy as possible, with ample parking as close to the main street as possible

· While they generally support proposed developments of Market Hall, the laneway, and the Edinburgh Street site, they have concerns about the impact on parking, traffic volumes, and access

· They often don’t see value in, or don’t see it as council business to invest in gathering spaces, public realm improvements, or activations.

23. Feedback received from people who see Pukekohe as a town centre:

· Their priority is people and families living in Pukekohe and providing safe walking, cycling and mobility for them

· They see the town centre as a social space where they go there to socialise, dine,

relax and be entertained

· They want activities, spaces to meet, play and relax

· They are more likely to argue for safe cycling facilities into and around the town centre, and wider footpaths, which they see as consistent with a small-town vibe

· Many see the long-term benefits of developing active mode connections to the train station (benefits for residents and visitors) and increasing public transport services. Those who want to keep driving to access the town centre are more likely to accept parking further away from their destination(s).

24. Parking was another topic that was of concern to some people. The approach within the masterplan was to prioritise parking closest to King Street for short stay shoppers and visitors, with long stay parking located further away. No changes are proposed to existing parking on King Street.

25. The consultation material explained to the community that more than 100 carparks on the top half of the Farmers building have been purchased and made available for public use. A project is in place to make improvements to the parking building to respond to the community’s concerns with this building.

26. Additional on-street parking is proposed within the masterplan on Roulston Street and Graham Street to compensate for some of the parking to be removed for the Edinburgh Street Superblock Development. These two streets were selected for additional on-street parking due to the proximity to the town centre and the ability to tie in with intersection upgrades on Massey Ave to facility safe and convenient pedestrian access to the town centre.

27. During consultation staff noted that a comprehensive parking management plan would be undertaken together with Auckland Transport to address concerns about the 7 Massey Ave site.

28. Community feedback on the seven consultation themes included:

Theme	Community Feedback
Unique History	· Keep the town centre/main street “look and feel,” with unique shops, heritage buildings, and development restricted to two to three storeys. · Maintain the diverse mix of retail, hospitality and services in the town centre. · Develop laneways to improve connections between streets. · Create opportunities within project design and implementation for public art, lighting, trees and plantings, and spaces for activation (festivals, markets, events etc.), meeting, relaxation, and play.
Market Hall	· Market Hall should be open, spacious, bright and sunny, with good ventilation and shelter from rain and wind. · The design should reflect the rural character of the town with a contemporary look and feel. · The spaces could be designed for flexible use, to be used throughout the week for a range of activities. · Design for a vendor mix that includes local farm produce stalls, artisan goods, and eateries that source locally. · Design for access by all people including the elderly, families with young children, people with mobility aids, and people on bikes and scooters. · Plan for Market Hall to complement, rather than compete with local businesses.
Development Opportunities	Developments should prioritise: · A variety of independent hospitality and accommodation. · Boutique retail including a deli, artisan products, arts and crafts, and non-duopoly grocers. · Shared office or co-working space. · Healthcare services. · Entertainment and sport for all ages, including space for youth, a concert or live entertainment venue, and an indoor sport arena.
Gathering Spaces	· Projects relating to the proposed laneway, and improvements to Franklin: The Centre, should have key outcomes to improve connectivity between Franklin: The Centre, the town square, Devon Lane, Edinburgh Street, and Bledisloe Park, through the creation of walking and cycling friendly spaces that are safe for everyone. · Work with Auckland Transport to support walking and cycling spaces through the reduction of vehicle speeds and traffic volumes in these streets and spaces. · The laneway should be an outdoor dining zone, possibly with a glass ceiling for weather-proofing and as a reference to the Glasshouses of Pukekohe. · Development of gathering spaces should prioritise art, seating and tables to eat lunch, an outdoor cinema, and space for events. · Gathering spaces should contain green spaces for play and leisure, and safe spaces for children to roam and run around. Trees and planting will provide some weather protection, and other weather protection should be explored.
Safer Streets	· Safety improvements for people walking and cycling should be prioritised on King Street, Edinburgh Street, Stadium Drive, Manukau Road, East Street, and Massey Avenue. In particular, the connections between the town square and Franklin: The Centre, and the town centre and railway station should have footpaths developed into wider shared paths. · Consider one-way operation to facilitate safer walking and cycling spaces for users of all ages and abilities. · Pedestrian crossings be relocated to improve visibility and safety, that tables be replaced with zebra crossings and signage to make pedestrian priority clear. · Enable safer crossing outside Pukekohe Intermediate and Valley Primary Schools. · Work with Auckland Transport to raise awareness of pedestrian and cyclist safety and promote respect between road users. · Pedestrian overbridge should be well-lit.
Parking Needs	· Concerns regarding the loss of carparks as a result of the redevelopment of sites. · Where on-street carparks are removed, use the space for wider walkways, bike paths, spaces for scooters, walking, and cycling. · Increase the amount of disability car parks and provide a range of short-term and longer-term parking in the town centre. · Ensure parking is available for larger vehicles. · Review plans for angle parking to ensure a safe environment can be provided for people walking and cycling. · Consider a level of car parking as part of any mixed-use site development.
Quick Fixes	· Greening: More trees, plantings, natives and edibles. · Activities and/or installations: Music, art, lights, outdoor cinema, paint murals, paint roundabouts, BBQ area and playground. · Walking and cycling improvements: Footpath maintenance, removal of slippery cobblestones and tiles, more bike parking. · Using carparks for café seating eg: Kaos café. · Traffic improvements: More pedestrian crossings, lower speed limits, pedestrianise King Street. · Other improvements: Fix roads, quicker cleaning of graffiti, more security cameras, more rubbish and recycling bins and more toilets.

29. In response to all the above, Eke Panuku has reviewed the Unlock Pukekohe masterplan and adjusted its focus on several items which were not in the programme before.

30. Attachment C provides a set of maps showing the old Spatial Delivery Plans and the updated, final proposed plan.

31. In response to all the above, Eke Panuku has reviewed the Unlock Pukekohe programme and made the following changes:

· Move the 7 Massey Ave site development to a 10+ year project. This was the most contentious project within the masterplan feedback. Eke Panuku proposes to delay this project and look to incorporate integrated parking (basement or sleeved multi story) if required in the future within any development proposal. Currently the development market cannot achieve this financially due to land value and construction costs

· Through development agreements, the sale of parking sites will be required to supply on-site parking suitable for their new building users in the future.

· Remove the pedestrian bridge project as a safe pedestrian route is being delivered through intersection works on Massey Ave with signals going ahead. There was mixed feedback on this project with comments questioning its value due to the proposed cost

· A new project for the Station Precinct - focus on providing a safe, active mode link between the train station and the town centre. This was in response to a high number of submissions questioning the lack of active mode connections between the schools, the train station and the town centre and submissions from Waka Kotahi and Pukekohe High School

· Alter the scope of the Roulston Street Parking Management Solutions project to incorporate the active mode connection in the project.

32. Additionally in response to local board feedback, Eke Panuku will immediately progress investigating opportunities for Franklin: The Centre enhancements with the council group to support existing community activities and attract new activities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33. Eke Panuku has made a commitment to respond to the climate emergency and take prompt, meaningful action to address climate change.

34. The programme focuses on retaining mature trees wherever possible in accordance with Auckland’s Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy.

35. Emissions associated with any potential redevelopment can be reduced through development standards agreed through a future development agreement, application of Eke Panuku Homestar 6 policy and requirements to reduce carbon emissions in commercial developments.

36. To mitigate Climate Change impacts, Eke Panuku will be:

· assessing sites in the Unlock Pukekohe project area for the potential for green infrastructure initiatives to address climate adaptation – both public realm and development sites

· engaging with Healthy Waters and Engineering and Technical Services at Auckland Council when undertaking development planning on all sites that have identified flood risk

· ensuring specific engineering advice about flood risk is built into Development Agreements

· ensuring potential overheating of residential developments is assessed through the design process

· implementing Environmental Management Plans for all developments.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37. Eke Panuku held multiple workshops with Auckland Transport, Auckland Council and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited to discuss the proposed changes to the masterplan and receive feedback on the proposed projects.

38. Auckland Transport and Eke Panuku are working together to ensure the successful delivery of the Pukekohe programme. Staff are collaborating on the Intersection improvement works at Stadium Drive and East Street and Stadium Drive and King Street/Manukau Road/Massey Ave. Staff are jointly working on Centre Integrated Transport Land-use Plans for the centres which combine transport outcomes with the HLPP vision and goals. Any future Comprehensive Parking Management Plans for the centre will be worked on jointly.

39. Council departments and Council Controlled Organisations have been engaged by Eke Panuku through the development of the Unlock Pukekohe Spatial Delivery Plan. Engagement is ongoing, especially with regards to the Franklin: The Centre project, Market Precinct, Roulston Park and intersection or street upgrades.

40. Eke Panuku will use the Auckland Transport Design Review Panel (DRP) for street upgrade projects and submit the final designs for review and feedback.

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

Local impacts and local board views

41. Eke Panuku has worked with the Franklin Local Board since inception of the Unlock Pukekohe programme and has provided regular updates to ensure the views of the local board are considered and consistent with the strategic vision outlined in the High Level Project Plan (HLPP) and Framework Plan.

42. Eke Panuku worked with the local board during the Innovating Streets for People trial and listened to the feedback when informed aspects of the trial were not working, collaborating to make sure the local community were being listened to and ensuring the best results for the town centre.

43. At a workshop held in February 2023, the proposed masterplan for Pukekohe was presented to the local board. There was positive support with some concerns on specific matters and timing of projects. Overall the plan was supported and minor changes were made in response to the comments made.

44. The updated plan aligns with the Franklin Local Board Plan 2020 in particular with:

45. Outcome 1: Our strengths generate local opportunity and prosperity, Outcome 2: Improved transport options and fit for purpose roads, Outcome 5: Cultural heritage and Māori identity is expressed in our communities and Outcome 6: A sense of belonging and strong community participation.

46. The key initiatives in these outcomes specifically related to the Unlock Pukekohe area include:

• Regenerate Pukekohe town centre through the Kia Puāwai o Pukekohe programme, recycling assets to prepare Pukekohe for growth and development in Paerata, Drury and north Waikato so it can thrive whilst retaining Pukekohe’s local character and identity

• Support the development and promotion of rural south Auckland as the nation’s food bowl

• Work with Panuku Development Auckland and Auckland Transport to deliver better and safer pedestrian and cycling connections in and to the Pukekohe town centre through Kia Puāwai o Pukekohe/ the Unlock Pukekohe programme and as set out in the Pukekohe Paths plan

• Improve our walking and cycling capability by advocating for the inclusion of pedestrian and bike friendly infrastructure in our villages and town centres e.g. bike racks

• Work with mana whenua and local historic societies to tell the stories of our places including parks, community centres and libraries, and supporting opportunities for digital and physical interpretation of stories

• Partner with local organisations to provide creative spaces and to promote participation in the delivery of events and the arts e.g. as suppliers, exhibitors, and performers.

47. Eke Panuku has made iterative changes to the masterplan following each workshop with the local board in response to its feedback.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

48. Twelve Tāmaki Makaurau mana whenua iwi and hapū have interests in the broader Pukekohe area. Eke Panuku engagement with mana whenua through the Unlock Pukekohe mana whenua project working group has been ongoing since 2016.

49. The feedback received from mana whenua included:

· discussion over developing the vision for Pukekohe with mana whenua further

· agreement that the Unlock Pukekohe Masterplan looks “good and interesting”

· agreement to prepare a combined Te Waiohua Cultural Values Assessment to guide the narrative of the whole programme and to inform project outcomes

· essential Outcomes for development sites to include cultural narratives and mana whenua outcomes. Eke Panuku develops the land on behalf of the council by securing a preferred development partner for agreed sites. Essential Outcomes are a document prepared by Eke Panuku to help shape design responses and to identify key requirements for sites to achieve Eke Panuku’s vision for the area. It includes requirements such as incorporating sustainable features, cultural design representation, desired uses on the site and overall design integration with the surrounding town centre

· commercial opportunities for mana whenua when site become available for sale in the programme. Commercial opportunities are the ability for council to work as landowner with mana whenua iwi to explore their capacity and capability to partner with Eke Panuku on a site sale and development. These opportunities are identified in the programme and the supporting masterplan.

· project specific comments at a detailed level regarding materials, planting and finishes.

50. The feedback received from mana whenua included:

• discussion over developing the vision for Pukekohe with mana whenua further

• agreement that the Unlock Pukekohe Masterplan looks “good and interesting”

• agreement to prepare a combined Te Waiohua Cultural Values Assessment to guide the narrative of the whole programme and to inform project outcomes

• essential outcomes for development sites to include cultural narratives and mana whenua outcomes

• commercial opportunities for mana whenua when site become available for sale in the programme

• project specific comments at a detailed level regarding materials, planting and finishes.

51. The Combined Cultural Values Assessment was completed in November 2022 outlining Te Waiohua priorities to be included meaningfully within the programme of works for Kia Puawai a Pukekohe.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

52. Eke Panuku has rearranged the financial implications for this programme. Where projects expanded, new projects added and projects removed, the budget has been adjusted to match the financial priorities and budget constraints.

53. In response to the budget challenges above, Eke Panuku has reviewed the Unlock Pukekohe programme and made the following changes:

· prioritise the Market Precinct Project

· prioritise design investigations to Franklin: The Centre integration works

· remove the Skate Park extension from the Roulston Park project

· deprioritise the Train Station to Centre connections project to after FY26 (due to the current train network upgrade underway).

54. The development site sales net proceeds will contribute towards public works projects identified in Eke Panuku’s Unlock Pukekohe Spatial Delivery Plan and its supporting programme as part of the wider regional funding policy that enables Eke Panuku to undertake regeneration in town centres through surplus asset divestment.

55. The funds have been forecasted and will be submitted to the Eke Panuku governance forum for approval.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

56. The Programme for Unlock Pukekohe is funded through the divestment of surplus and underutilised council group property, in agreement with the local board and the governing body of the council. There is always ongoing risk due to land values and market conditions.

57. The Eke Panuku programme to improve the public realm areas will increase the probability of sales and potential values of the sites for sale and attract new investment, residents, visitors and potentially businesses to revitalise the areas surrounding the key development sites overtime.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. Eke Panuku will continue investigations of the projects listed in the attachments.

59. Eke Panuku will continue updates to the community and stakeholders.

60. Eke Panuku will work with mana whenua, Auckland Transport, and the council to ensure an aligned approach.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Unlock Pukekohe: Supporting Masterplan (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇩	Unlock Pukekohe: Spatial Delivery Plan FY24-26	21
c ⇩	Unlock Pukekohe: Iterations of Spatial Delivery Plans	23
d ⇩	Unlock Pukekohe: Supporting Masterplan Summary	27

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Richard Davison - Priority Location Director, Eke Panuku Development Auckland
Authoriser	Sarah McGhee – Acting Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Supporting Growth report on future transport networks Pukekohe-Paerata and south Drury	35
b ⇩	Map 1 - Full Network Map	39
c ⇩	Map 2 - New NE arterial alignment March 2023	41
d ⇩	Map 3 - Pukekohe full network map (new)	43

Franklin Local Board

27 June 2023

Franklin Local Parks Management Plan - intention to prepare plan report

File No.: CP2023/06768

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Franklin Local Board to publicly notify its intention to prepare the Franklin Local Parks Management Plan.

2. To approve the scope and engagement approach for the development of the Franklin Local Parks Management Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. In June 2022, Franklin Local Board approved the development of the Franklin Local Parks Management Plan (Resolution number FR/2022/92).

4. Once adopted, the Franklin Local Parks Management Plan (LPMP) will provide a policy framework to manage use, protection and development of the Franklin local parks network.

5. Land in scope of the LPMP, includes park land for which the local board has delegated decision-making, held under both the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA).

6. Open space is excluded from the scope of the plan where:

· it is not owned or managed by Auckland Council

· the local board does not have a decision-making role (e.g. regional parks, unformed legal road and drainage reserves).

7. For unformed legal roads and drainage reserves that act as open space, the local board’s advocacy can be expressed through the plan.

8. The development of the LPMP will follow the process outlined in the Reserves Act 1977 (see Attachment A).

9. Approval is sought to notify the intention to prepare a plan and to invite written suggestions, pursuant to section 41(5) of the Reserves Act.

10. The public notices are likely to be published in July/August 2023, and the deadline for written suggestions will be a minimum of one month later.

11. This report outlines the engagement approach for the development of the local parks management plan, including online interactive platforms for receiving community feedback such as Social Pinpoint (see Attachment D).

12. The cost of public notification will be met from the existing project budget.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) approve public notification of their intention to prepare a Franklin Local Parks Management Plan for all local parks and reserves in the Franklin Local Board area and invite written suggestions on the proposed plan.

b) approve the scope (Attachment B and C) and engagement approach (Attachment D) for development of the Franklin Local Parks Management Plan.

Horopaki

Context

Background information

13. In June 2022, the local board approved the development of a Franklin Local Parks Management plan (LPMP) as part of the adoption of the 2021/2022 Customer and Community Services work programme (Resolution number FR/2022/92).

14. The Franklin Local Board has decision-making over approximately 190 parks and reserves, of which approximately 29 parks (or 15 per cent) are covered by existing reserve management plans. All of these reserve management plans are 10 years old or more, and will be superseded by the new LPMP (see paragraphs 25 to 29 for more details).

15. This report covers the ‘what, why and how’ of preparing an LPMP and seeks approval from the local board to initiate the first round of public consultation.

What is a local parks management plan?

16. The LPMP is a statutory document for land held under the Reserves Act 1977. Section 41(1) of the Act requires the council to create management plans for certain classifications of reserves. This also means that the council is legally bound to adhere to management plans.

17. The content of the LPMP (outlined in Attachment B) provides:

· a framework of high-level values and principles to guide objectives and policies that apply across all parks

· guidance on issues impacting individual parks and intentions to manage those issues

· overarching direction for leases and other activities requiring landowner approval for relevant parks.

Why do we need a local parks management plan?

18. LPMPs are an important tool to protect the values of parks while providing for appropriate activities. They provide a framework for consistent, transparent decision-making for managing and developing park land that guides the local board, council group, other organisations and the wider community.

19. The table below gives an overview of the benefits of LPMPs:

A diagram of benefits and examples

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

What park land is included in the LPMP?

20. The scope of the LPMP includes park land for which the local board has delegated decision-making authority, both under the Reserves Act 1977 or the Local Government Act 2002.

21. For unformed legal roads and drainage reserves that act as open space, the local board has an advocacy role which can be expressed through the LPMP.

22. A summary of the park land in scope of the LPMP is shown in the table below, see Attachment C for more detail and specific examples:

In scope

Land for which the local board has allocated decision-making

ü land held under Reserves Act 1977

ü park land held under Local Government Act 2002

Advocacy role only

Land for which the local board does not have allocated decision-making, but that does fulfill an open space function

· legal roads and drainage reserves that have a significant open space function

Out of scope

Land for which the local board does not have allocated decision-making

û drainage reserves and roads (unless they have a significant open space function – see above)

û regional park land

û park land owned and managed by other entities such as the Tupuna Maunga Authority

û parks governed under a co-management agreement such as Waiomanu Pa Kainga Reserve

Continuous review

23. A list of existing reserve management plans (RMPs) for Franklin local parks to be superseded in the LPMP can be found in Attachment E. If additional plans are discovered during research, advice will be provided to the local board for consideration as to whether they should be superseded.

24. The main benefit of superseding existing RMPs within the LPMP is to fulfil the requirement of the Reserves Act to keep RMPs under continuous review. It also ensures that plans reflect current community and mana whenua aspirations for these parks.

25. An overview of parks within the local board area that have non-statutory plans, but not RMPs, and recommendations on their inclusion in the LPMP, are provided in Attachment F.

26. Staff recommend to include all parks without existing RMPs within the scope of the LPMP, to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Reserves Act. Including these parks within the LPMP will also give an opportunity to resolve leasing issues which have been identified through the spatial plans.

27. Existing spatial plans, such as park specific masterplans and concept plans will not be superseded by the LPMP. The parks specific section of the LPMP can reflect the direction of adopted spatial plans.

Approval to notify the intention to prepare a local parks management plan

28. To develop a LPMP compliant with both the Reserves Act and the LGA, it is prudent to prepare the plan using the procedures for developing reserve management plans set out in the Reserves Act (Attachment A).

29. The process required under the Reserves Act includes two formal rounds of public consultation.

30. This report seeks approval for the first round of public consultation obtaining feedback to inform the development of a draft plan.

31. Public notices are anticipated to be published in July/August 2023. The deadline for written suggestions will be at least one month after the notification date.

32. The second round of consultation will be undertaken once the draft LPMP has been prepared and approved for public consultation by the local board.

Tailored community engagement

33. Consultation beyond the statutory requirements of the Reserves Act will be undertaken, by providing different ways for key partners, stakeholders and the wider community to provide feedback.

34. Planned engagement activities include paper and online tools, and the use of an innovative digital social mapping tool to capture comments and suggestions on individual parks (see Attachment D).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. The decisions in this report are largely administrative with a low likelihood of direct impact on greenhouse gas emissions. However, the management direction set in the future LPMP, could emphasise the role of local parks in climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

36. The LPMP programme will seek input from council units and council-controlled organisations, including Active Communities, Infrastructure and Environmental Services, Parks and Community Facilities (including Leasing), Community and Social Policy, Plans and Places (Heritage), Legal Services, Eke Panuku Development Auckland, and Auckland Transport, amongst others.

37. Staff will work closely with council departments to draft the LPMP ensuring alignment with other council plans where possible, and that any direction provided in the LPMP on council’s activities on parks is understood.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Local impacts

38. The LPMP will give local residents and park users the opportunity to influence the direction for future park management and development.

Local board views

39. Staff discussed the proposed scope of the LPMP, and the first round of public notification, with the local board at a workshop in May 2023.

40. At the workshop, the local board indicated their in principle support for the proposed scope of the LPMP and the first round of public notification.

41. Local board members also raised questions at the workshop about the relationship between the LPMP and the Shoreline Adaptation Plans currently being developed for the Franklin Local Board area.

42. The Shoreline Adaptation Plans (SAP) are non-statutory documents that seek to guide and inform decision makers on recommended steps to take in relation to the impacts of climate change, specifically on coastal areas.

43. Through the LPMP drafting process, the local board will be able to consider local park policy guidance in relation to climate change and natural hazards. It will also allow for the consideration of any relevant management intentions for individual parks.

44. At the workshop, local board members raised further topics they would like to consider during plan drafting. These include:

· the potential for public private partnerships, such as commercial sponsorship

· co-management arrangements with iwi

· approaches for underutilised parks

· identifying appropriate locations for self-contained vehicle camping on Reserves Act land.

45. The local board will be able to consider policy guidance in relation to these topics through plan drafting. The local board can also develop management intentions to address issues and opportunities at an individual park level.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

46. The Reserves Act is one of the Acts in the First Schedule to the Conservation Act 1987. Section 4 of the Conservation Act contains an obligation to give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi (te Tiriti / the Treaty).

47. In performing functions and duties under the Reserves Act, like developing a reserve management plan, the local board must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti / the Treaty.

48. The principles of te Tiriti / the Treaty likely to be most relevant in making decisions on the Franklin LPMP and land status review work are:

· partnership – mutual good faith and reasonableness

· informed decision-making – being well-informed of mana whenua interests and views. Consultation is a means to achieve informed decision-making

· active protection – this involves the active protection of Māori interests retained under te Tiriti / the Treaty. It includes the promise to protect rangatiratanga and taonga.

49. The LGA contains obligations to Māori, including to facilitate Māori participation in council decision-making processes (sections 4; 14(1)(d); 81(1)(a)).

50. All interested mana whenua will be engaged in the development of the LPMP in order to:

· enable Te Ao Māori (Māori world view) to be incorporated into the management of parks in the Franklin Local Board area

· provide an opportunity for mana whenua to express their kaitiaki role.

51. The Franklin LPMP project will be introduced at the Parks, Sport and Recreation Mana Whenua Forum in the near future, and at this forum mana whenua will be invited to participate in the plan drafting process.

52. Feedback will be sought from mana whenua about the classification review underway before reporting recommendations to the local board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

53. At its meeting on 28 June 2022, the Franklin Local Board adopted the 2022/2023 Franklin Local Board Customer and Community Services work programme (Resolution number FR/2022/92), which included the key initiative to develop an omnibus Franklin LPMP.

54. The local board allocated $25,000 in financial year 2022/2023 and forecast $30,000 in financial year 2023/2024 to cover costs associated with the project. The budget includes the delivery of public notification, mana whenua and community engagement, specialist technical advice and hearings.

55. Costs associated with public notification (as per the recommendation in this report) and any future project costs will be covered by any local board budget that has been allocated in the 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 financial years. If there are any future budget shortfalls, these may be met from regional budgets.

56. Costs associated with public notification (as per the recommendation in this report) and any future project costs will be covered by any local board budget that has been allocated in the 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 financial years. If there are any future budget shortfalls, these may be met from regional budgets.

57. If development of the LPMP needs reprioritising at a later date because of changing resource capacity for work programmes, an alternate timeline will be presented for local board consideration.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. A risk assessment was undertaken as part of the planning for the development of the LPMP. The following table outlines relevant risks and mitigations.

THEN

Possible mitigations

If the community are having to engage with council over multiple topics at the same time.

Then the community may not provide feedback on how they would like parks in their area managed in the future. This means that the LPMP may not accurately reflect community aspirations.

· Align with other engagement activity where possible to make it easy for the community to participate.

· Use multiple engagement channels to reach the community, including those people who do not normally take up the opportunity to engage.

· Review results of engagement activities that have been undertaken recently to see if feedback has been given that is relevant for the development of the LPMP.

If the community suffers from ‘consultation fatigue’ due to being involved with a number of council consultation processes recently.

Then the community may display a more limited interest in providing feedback for this project.

· Ensure we use creative and innovative engagement methods to peak the interest of the community, to encourage them to submit feedback.

· Make sure the engagement methods (particular online systems) are working effectively and are simple for the public to provide their input.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59. The high-level timeline including key project and consultation milestones, and local board decision-making is outlined in Attachment A to this report.

60. The next steps in development of the LPMP are:

· publicly notify the intention to prepare the management plan for at least one month starting in July/August 2023

· initiate engagement and partnership with mana whenua

· commence targeted engagement with key stakeholders

· continue working on the land status review of all park and reserve land.

61. Suggestions from the first round of consultation will be given full consideration in preparing the draft plan.

62. It is anticipated that the draft Franklin Local Parks Management Plan will be available for public consultation in early or mid 2024.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	High-level timeline and process	53
b ⇩	Content in scope	55
c ⇩	Scope of park land	57
d ⇩	Engagement Approach	59
e ⇩	Parks with existing Reserve Management Plans to be superseded in Franklin LPMP	61
f ⇩	Parks with non-statutory plans to be included in the Franklin LPMP	65

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Chris Khouri - Service and Asset Planner

Authoriser

Justine Haves - General Manager Regional Services & Strategy

Sarah McGhee – Acting Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

27 June 2023

Auckland Unitary Plan - Local board views on Proposed Plan Change 91 (Private) for 80 McLarin Road, Glenbrook Beach

File No.: CP2023/07369

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a private plan change by HD Project 2 Ltd for 80 McLarin Road, Glenbrook Beach.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers on a private plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in Part) 2016 (AUP) must consider a local board’s views on the plan change, if the local board chooses to provide their views.

3. HD Project 2 Ltd lodged Private Plan Change 91 for 80 McLarin Road, Glenbrook Beach. The purpose of the plan change is to rezone land at this site. The rezoning relates to changing the operative, existing zone of land from Future Urban Zone (FUZ) to Residential - Mixed Housing Suburban (MHS) Zone in the AUP. The application also includes applying new precinct provisions to the land at 80 McLarin Road that modify the standard MHS provisions and apply the Stormwater Management Area – Flow1 (SMAF1) Overlay.

4. Plan Change 91 was publicly notified on 14 April 2023 with the submission period closing on 16 May 2023.

5. Forty submissions were received. Key submission themes included the impact of the development on the character of the area, impacts with regard to climate change, adequacy of roading, public transport, water, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure and a request to change to Single House zoning rather than MHS zoning (with reference to covenants said to have been utilised for another local property development).

6. The Summary of Decisions Requested (SDR) – which provides a summary of ‘primary’ submissions received (with original submissions attached), was notified on 9 June 2023, with the further submission period closing on 23 June 2023.

7. 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 Plan Change 91. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provide local board views on Plan Change 91 by HD Project 2 Ltd for 80 McLarin Road, Glenbrook Beach

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on Plan Change 91, if considered necessary by the local board

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 private plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

8. 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 (ss15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

9. A private plan change request will be included in the Auckland Unitary Plan if it is approved. Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on private plan change requests – when an entity other than the council proposes a change to the Auckland Unitary Plan.

10. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the planner includes those views in the hearing report. The hearing report will address issues raised in local board views and submissions by themes.

11. If appointed by resolution, local board members may present the local board’s views at the hearing to commissioners, who decide on the private plan change request.

12. This report provides an overview of the private plan change, and a summary of submissions’ key themes.

13. The report does not recommend what the local board should convey, if the local board expresses its views on private Plan Change 91. The planner must include any local board views verbatim in the evaluation of the private plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Locality

14. The plan change area is located in the Glenbrook Beach settlement, bound by McLarin Road on the north-west and east. Glenbrook Beach is approximately a 15 minute drive from Waiuku and a 24-29 minute drive from Pukekohe.^{^[1]} Glenbrook Beach is not currently serviced by public transport.

15. The older residential area in Glenbrook Beach is to the immediate south-west of the plan change area, along Ronald Avenue. To the immediate north-west of the plan change area is newer residential development (Kahawai Point special housing area) enabled by the Glenbrook 3 Precinct.

16. An area of Business – Local Centre zoned land which is not yet developed is on McLarin Road, directly to the east of the plan change area. The existing Glenbrook Beach Recreation Reserve is adjacent to the plan change area, on the west.

Plan Change overview

17. The private plan change seeks to rezone land at 80 McLarin Road, Glenbrook Beach. See Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Existing AUP zoning: Subject site is Future Urban Zone (yellow), area to the east is Mixed Rural Zone (stripes) and areas to north/west is Single House Zone (beige). The blue outline shows extent of the applicant’s landholding and the plan change area.

18. HD Project 2 Ltd states the purpose of Plan Change 91 is to introduce appropriate urban zoning for the subject site. This would include residential with a variety of housing types and would integrate with the existing Glenbrook Beach settlement and provide flexibility to develop higher densities in proximity to the land zoned Business – Local Centre nearby. The plan change would also provide legible connections in the form of walkways, cycleways and roads within the existing Glenbrook Beach settlement and the Kahawai Point settlement. The protection and enhancement of the wetlands and intermittent streams form part of this request and these would be integrated into the urban neighbourhood.

19. Plan Change 91 seeks the following changes to the AUP:

· change the zoning from FUZ to MHS Zone

· apply the Stormwater Management area – Flow 1 (SMAF1) Overlay

· apply new precinct provisions (Glenbrook 4 Precinct) that modify the standard MHS zone provisions to reflect the site characteristic and context and to achieve site specific development outcomes

· the precinct plan identifies three indicative vehicle access locations, an indicative green interface on the boundary with Glenbrook Beach Recreation Reserve, and an indicative pedestrian/cycleway across the subject site between Glenbrook Beach Recreation Reserve and the existing Open Space – Informal Recreation and Local Centre Zones on McLarin Road.

20. The plan change includes technical reports that evaluate zoning including precinct provisions, a stormwater management plan, ecology and wetlands, urban design, economics, cultural values assessment, archaeology, infrastructure, geology, traffic, contaminated land (preliminary site investigation) and a structure plan. The reports and other application details are available from the council’s website here.

21. The council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· technical reports supplied by the applicant

· submissions

· views and preferences of the local board if the local board passes a resolution.

Site characteristics and constraints

22. The total area of the subject site is 7.98ha of land. Future subdivision and development of the site is predicted to yield 75-125 additional dwellings.

23. The plan change describes the plan change area as characterised by rolling topography, with shelter belt vegetation, three small natural wetlands, and a network of modified watercourses. A ridgeline runs from west to east across the centre of the site, separating the elevated plateau in the northern portion of the site from the sloping land to the south. The southwestern corner is low-lying and is located approximately 150m from the coast.

24. Overland flow paths traverse the plan change area, generally towards the low-lying area in the south-western corner of the plan change area. Pockets of the area are identified as being within the 1% annual exceedance probability (AEP) floodplain. These floodplains are associated with flat land in the northern portion of the site and the watercourse in the western site catchment. Another floodplain area in the southwestern catchment is connected to the significant floodplain system in the Glenbrook Beach township associated with the low-lying, flat land fronting the beach. A very small portion of that floodplain area is also subject to the coastal inundation mapping in the AUP.

Strategic planning context

25. The Future Urban Land Supply Strategy 2017 (FULSS) is a council strategy that indicates the sequencing of when different Future Urban zoned areas across Auckland are anticipated to be development ready i.e. have infrastructure to support urban development. The FULSS identifies the Future Urban zoned land in the plan change area to be development ready in the second half of Decade One (2023-2027).

26. A new Future Development Strategy (FDS) is being developed by the council and is currently being consulted on (4 June – 4 July). The consultation draft FDS proposes extending out the time periods for when different Future Urban zoned areas will be development ready. For the Future Urban zoned area in Glenbrook Beach the draft FDS proposes the area will be development ready 2030+.

27. Future funding and the provision of infrastructure necessary to support urban development in the plan change area will be considered in the council’s planner’s report and the decision-making process on Plan Change 91.

28. Plan Change 78 (PC78) is the council intensification planning instrument required to incorporate the medium density residential standards (MDRS) into relevant residential zones, and to give effect to the National Policy Statement on Urban Development (NPS-UD). PC78 was notified in August 2022 and is part way through the statutory intensification streamlined planning process.

29. Small settlements outside the urban environment with a population of less than 5,000 (as at 2018 census), such as Glenbrook Beach, are not required to have the MDRS incorporated into their residential zones. PC78 proposes minor amendments to the Single House Zone and the MHS Zone to identify that these zones can only be applied to such smaller settlements outside the urban environment. Therefore PC78 and the requirements of MDRS and the NPS-UD do not affect Plan Change 91 and the MHS Zone proposed.

Themes from submissions received

30. Plan Change 91 was publicly notified on 14 April 2023 with the submission period closing on 16 May 2023. The SDR was notified on 9 June, with the further submission period closing on 23 June 2023.

31. Submissions were made by 40 submitters (both people and organisations).

32. Key submission themes are listed below:

· Change of zoning generally, the scale and type of growth including type of housing.

· The impact of the development on the existing rural and coastal nature of the area.

· The development has not considered the impacts with regard to climate change .

· Inadequate infrastructure in the area in terms of roads, water, stormwater and wastewater.

· Lack of public transport in the area.

· Essential services such as fire/ambulance, retail and professional services are inadequate for this development.

· No provision for additional local amenities such as schools and playgrounds.

· Request to maintain single house zone and covenants utilized elsewhere in the area or for further information.

Table 1: Submissions

Submissions	Number of submissions
In support, with suggested amendments	5
In support but with provisos	1
Part support, part oppose	1
Oppose but if approved, with suggested amendments	3
Decline	30

33. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from the council’s website here.

34. At the time of writing this report the further submission period is still open, so the number of further submissions received is unknown. A verbal update on this can be provided to the local board if required, although it should be noted that further submissions are only able to support or oppose primary submissions received and are not able to raise new matters. Therefore further submissions will not change the submission themes identified above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Context

35. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan sets out Auckland’s climate goals:

· 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).

36. The local board could consider if the private plan change:

· will reduce, increase or have no effect on Auckland’s overall greenhouse gas emissions

· prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change (i.e. does the private plan change elevate or alleviate climate risks (e.g. flooding, coastal and storm inundation, urban heat effect, stress on infrastructure)

Submitters’ views

37. Submissions outlined the following climate change matters:

· intensification of the site will have potential adverse effect on greenhouse gas emissions given the use of private vehicles and lack of public transport

· change in zoning will have adverse effects on the council’s carbon reduction plans

· development of the site fails to assess the impact of climate change.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38. The plan change application states that they met or corresponded with relevant Auckland Council departments or Council Controlled Organisations before lodging the plan change request, including the Parks department, Auckland Transport, Watercare, Healthy Waters and the Franklin Local Board.

39. Plans and Places will seek advice from Healthy Waters and the appropriate parks team on the plan change, which will inform the recommendations made in the planner’s section 42A hearing report.

40. Auckland Transport submitted on the plan change. Their submission notes that the plan change assessment of effects is limited to the immediate area and has not considered effects on the wider network nor the cumulative effects of development on the wider network apart for identifying some minor safety improvements at the main intersections serving the development. Nor is there any assessment of future improvements that may be required to the network serving Glenbrook Beach. However, Auckland Transport considers that the plan change area is relatively small scale and is identified for development through its FUZ.

41. Auckland Transport indicates that they do not oppose the plan change if their matters raised are adequately addressed. These include a range of new and updated provisions in the Precinct Plan to provide a connected network of roads, pedestrian and active modes, road cross sections, upgrade to McLarin Road frontage, intersections, storm water management, vesting of public assets and consistency across private plan changes locally.

42. Watercare Services submitted on the plan change. Their submission states that there are no constraints to subdivision and development of the site from a bulk water supply perspective.

43. From a wastewater point of view, Watercare indicate that the South West Wastewater Servicing scheme is required to be operational before any new development on the site can be connected to their network. Watercare strongly supports precinct provisions that require this, and notes that the developer must fund the local wastewater infrastructure necessary to service the plan change area.

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

Local impacts and local board views

44. The private plan change request does not relate to public land for which the local board has decision making powers, however the Glenbrook Beach Recreation Reserve is directly adjacent to the plan change area.

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

· interests and preferences of people in local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

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

· responsibilities and operation of the local board

· whether the plan change responds to matters previously raised by the local board when it met with the applicant.^{^[2]}

46. 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 private plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

47. If the local board chooses to provide its views on the plan change it includes the opportunity to comment on matters that may be of interest or importance to Māori people, well-being of Māori communities or Te Ao Māori (Māori world view). There are 11,247 residents in the local board area who identify as Māori, in 2018 census results.

48. The applicant has indicated that they engaged with mana whenua to discuss the merits of the proposal and to get advice on cultural matters. A Cultural Values Assessment (CVA) was prepared by Ngāti te Ata for the plan change area and a site visit undertaken. The applicant advises that they intend to work collaboratively with Ngāti te Ata through the process to development.

49. A number of iwi groups (Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Paoa Iwi, Ngāti Paoa Trust, Ngāti Tamaterā, Ngāti te Ata, Ngāti Whanaunga, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Waikato- Tainui and Ngāi Tai ki Tamaki) were provided direct notice of the plan change upon notification.

50. Ngāti te Ata submitted on the plan change and oppose the application because they consider the applicant has not indicated how they propose to actually respect, protect and recognise the cultural, social and environmental issues which were matters raised in the CVA report.

51. No other iwi groups submitted on the plan change.

52. The hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The private plan change does not trigger an issue of significance as identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance and Māori Plan (2017, Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

53. The private plan change request does not pose any financial implications for the local board’s assets or operations.

54. Costs associated with processing the private plan change request will be recovered from the applicant.

55. Impacts on infrastructure arising from the private plan change request, including any financing and funding issues will be addressed in the hearing report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

56. There is a risk that the local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on the plan change, if it does not pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for the Franklin Local Board to express its views and preferences

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

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

58. The power to provide local board views regarding the content of a private plan change cannot be delegated to individual local board member(s) (Local Government Act 2002, Sch 7, cls 36D). This report enables the whole local board to decide whether to provide its views and, if so, to determine what matters those views should include.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

59. 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.

60. The planner will advise the local board of the decision on the private plan change request by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Katrina David - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager - Plans and Places

Sarah McGhee – Acting Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

Franklin Local Board

27 June 2023

Urgent Decision - Franklin Local Board input into the Integrated Auckland Transport Plan

File No.: CP2023/06968

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To report on the Urgent Decision made by the Franklin Local Board providing input to the Governing Body on the Integrated Auckland Transport Plan.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. At its meeting on 22 November 2022 the Franklin Local Board resolved (FR/2019/170) the following in relation to urgent decision-making:

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) delegate authority to the Chair Angela Fulljames and Deputy Chair Alan Cole, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board, if the local board is unable to meet

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

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

3. Auckland Council and the Government are working together on an integrated transport plan for Auckland.

4. Once the Mayor and Minister of Transport have agreed on the plan, it will be approved by the Governing Body and the government.

5. The plan aims to fix Auckland's transport network by ensuring there is a high-quality, connected transport system for cars, buses, trains, ferries, cyclists, pedestrians, freight, passenger rail and light rail. It covers immediate and pressing needs as well as long-term, city-shaping initiatives.

6. The Mayor’s Office was seeking views from Aucklanders to inform development of the plan including:

· guiding principles that will help decide how transport funding is allocated.

· how we prioritise different objectives

· types of projects that would be preferred funded as a priority.

7. This is a Mayor and Minister of Transport initiative. There is currently no draft plan but it builds on the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP), which has not been consulted on previously.

8. Since this was not providing views on the contents of a council plan, feedback was able to be delegated (LGA Schedule 7, Section 36D).

9. Public consultation was from 28 April to 14 May 2023, and the Mayoral response to it needed to be provided to the Minister at the beginning of June 2023.

Ngā tūtohunga

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) notes the Urgent Decision of the Franklin Local Board providing feedback on the Integrated Auckland Transport Plan on 23 May 2023:

That the Franklin Local Board:

a) provide the following feedback on the Integrated Auckland Transport Plan:

i) Question One – The plan proposes four guiding principles that will underpin work on the integrated transport plan. How important are each of these guiding principles?

· Reduce carbon emissions from the transport sector – Extremely important.

· Target investments to the most significant challenges – Extremely important

· Prioritise investments to achieve best value for money – Extremely important.

· Make better use of our existing road and public transport networks – Important.

ii) Question Two – Development of this plan will require us to prioritise different objectives and have different types of projects proceeding at different times. How important are each of these priorities to you?

· Improving transport access for Aucklanders that have poor access to jobs, education and services – Important.

· Auckland’s transport network allows efficient movement of people and goods around our city – Extremely important.

· Auckland’s transport system can cope with disruption from extreme weather events – Important.

· Deaths and serious injuries are significantly reduced – Important.

· Transport investment supports provision of new housing – Extremely important.

iii) Question Three – The integrated transport plan will involve agreeing which projects will be prioritised for implementation over the next decade and beyond. Do you support inclusion of these kinds of projects in the integrated transport plan for Auckland?

· Investing in mass rapid transit projects (Light Rail and busways) to deliver fast, frequent and reliable public transport on major corridors across Auckland – Strongly support.

· Delivering increased numbers of safe cycleways in urban Auckland – Support

· Faster and more frequent bus services through investment in bus lanes and more buses on existing routes – Strongly support.

· Transport investments to support more housing in fast growing suburbs – Strongly support

· Interventions to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on Auckland roads – Support

· Upgrades to busy arterial roads to support increased traffic as well as public transport, walking and cycling – Strongly support

· A range of inexpensive and quick changes to optimise roads across Auckland to ensure the space we have available on our roads is used more efficiently – Support.

· Upgrades to roads in industrial areas to support the efficient movement of freight around Auckland – Strongly support.

· Sealing unsealed (gravel) roads in rural areas of Auckland – Strongly support

· Removal of railway level crossings to separate trains and cars to allow more trains and reduce traffic congestion – Strongly support.

· Accelerating electrification of our bus and ferry fleets – Strongly support

· Improvements to ferry services and terminals, so ferries can run more reliably and frequently – Strongly support.

· Upgrades to our rail network to allow trains to run more often – Strongly support.

iv) Question Four - Are there any transport projects you would like to see prioritised that are not in the list just mentioned?

· Hingaia stage two 4 laning including signalisation of Oakland Rd.

· Supporting Growth south projects, South Indicative Strategic Transport Network designations, Route 18 Pukekohe Ring Road.

· signalisation of King/ Massey/Stadium/East Streets

· route protection - ensure quarry and freight routes are protected to ensure efficiencies and less impact on emissions. Improve the quality of roads to account for increased freight movements.

· ensure rural roads and routes to significant coastal settlements are resilient to storms and climate change e.g. access to Beachlands, Maraetai, and smaller settlements of Kawakawa Bay and Orere.

· ensure where development is consented, the road network can cope and consider planned routes such as the Whitford Bypass.

· rectify the poor planning outcome of Jutland Road, Pukekohe where a road should have been completed.

· bring up to the same standard as other areas in Auckland that have grown without addressing kerb/channeling/footpaths i.e. Beachlands.

· intersections - safety improvements, signalisation or roundabouts to be prioritised. This applies to all major routes in Franklin.

v) Question Five - Do you have any comments about the specific projects just mentioned or in general about transport in Auckland?

· prioritise heavy rail and electric trains. Rail crossings - only close rail crossings where there is a viable alternative.

· increased congestion increases emissions.

· consider a fleet of smaller more efficient and lower emission buses for rural areas. e.g. Bus service connections to ferries and from rural settlements to transport hubs.

· Mill Road and intersections such as Murphy’s Road / Redoubt Road intersection, Whitford-Maraetai Road and intersections with Clifton Road/Whitford Landfill/Trig Road

· plan for the future where there are proposals for significant developments – need transport resilience.

vi) Question Six – Is there any other feedback you would like to give about transport in Auckland?

· the Local Board Transport Capital fund inadequately addresses legacy council deficiencies (e.g. kerb, channelling and footpaths), business-as-usual safety improvements, planning oversights where developers should have been required to build infrastructure (Jutland bridge/road continuation)

· more emphasis into planning stages of developments to ensure cycle/walking paths, on road parking and street width are incorporated for settlements and villages that are unlikely to have access to public transport. Enable use of grass berms in rural environment for informal trails to reduce small journeys.

· route resilience is important especially for growing communities like Beachlands and Maraetai where roads that connect communities have essentially one road in and out are seriously impacted with climate change and when storms occur.

· the large growth in our communities are seeing increased traffic numbers / demands and intersections need upgrading. Traffic numbers now reaching stage of Whitford-Maraetai Road upgrade and the Whitford Bypass.

· greater emphasis on cycling and walking footpaths are required that support active transport and connect local destinations in rural areas is needed.

· consider congestion charging in Auckland; however a clear purpose of the revenue is required to understand how the revenue is used.

vii) Question Seven – Is there any other feedback you would like to give on something else?

· the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 requires local board views to be taken into consideration when developing strategies, policies, plans and bylaws. The board is concerned that it appears local board views on the Integrated Transport Plan are being sought at a very late stage in the process.

· resilience to flooding was workshopped with Auckland Transport in August 2020 with no outcome. Simple ideas that included flood markers and gates for road closures of regularly flooding roads would provide faster warning and more efficiency of traffic management resources.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent Decision - Integrated Auckland Transport Plan - Franklin Local Board	79

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Denise Gunn - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Carol McKenzie-Rex - Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board forward work calendar (Hōtaka Kaupapa) June 2023	85

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Franklin Local Board workshop record 2 May 2023	89
b ⇩	Franklin Local Board workshop record 9 May 2023	91
c ⇩	Franklin Local Board workshop record 16 May 2023	93
d ⇩	Franklin Local Board workshop record 23 May 2023	95
e ⇩	Franklin Local Board workshop record 30 May 2023	97

[2] The plan change states the applicant meet with representatives of the local board on 26 April 2022, and includes a summary of the matters discussed.

Chairperson	Angela Fulljames
Deputy Chairperson	Alan Cole
Members	Malcolm Bell JP
	Sharlene Druyven
	Gary Holmes
	Amanda Hopkins
	Andrew Kay
	Amanda Kinzett
	Logan Soole

Author	Bruce Thomas, Elected member Relationship Manager, Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Sarah McGhee – Acting Local Area Manager Franklin Manurewa Papakura

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