I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 19 March 2024

10:00am

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Office
1-7 The Strand
Takapuna

 

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

 

OPEN AGENDA

 

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Toni van Tonder

 

Deputy Chairperson

Terence Harpur

 

Members

Peter Allen

 

 

Gavin Busch

 

 

Melissa Powell

 

 

George Wood, CNZM

 

 

(Quorum 3 members)

 

 

 

Henare King

Democracy Advisor

 

14 March 2024

 

Contact Telephone: 027 2043 466

Email: henare.king@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

 

 


 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

ITEM   TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                         PAGE

1          Nau mai | Welcome                                                                                                        5

2          Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies                                                                                         5

3          Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest                                         5

4          Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes                                                    5

5          He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence                                                            5

6          Te Mihi | Acknowledgements                                                                                       5

7          Ngā Petihana | Petitions                                                                                                5

8          Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations                                                                    6

8.1     Pacific Padel - Installation of Padel Courts at Woodhall Park, Devonport    6

9          Te Matapaki Tūmatanui | Public Forum                                                                      6

10        Ngā Pakihi Autaia | Extraordinary Business                                                              6

11        Decision to remove or retain the trees on Anne Street, Devonport                        9

12        9 Kitchener Road                                                                                                         19

13        Proposed new community ground lease for Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated at Stanley Bay Park, Stanley Point                                                                                55

14        Representation review and local board reorganisation                                          71

15        Representation project – issues specific to Devonport-Takapuna Local Board 87

16        Proposals for More Empowered Local Boards                                                        91

17        Local board feedback on freshwater management in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland                                                                                                                                       99

18        Local board input to Auckland Council Submission on the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024-2034                                                                199

19        Update on Watercare and Eke Panuku work programmes for Quarter Three (Jan - Mar 2024) and CCO Engagement Plans                                                                  265

20        Amendment to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board meeting schedule for 30 April 2024                                                                                                                             273

21        Chairpersons' Report                                                                                                275

22        Elected Members' Reports                                                                                        281

23        Resolutions Pending Action report                                                                         301

24        Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - Resource Consent Applications - February 2024                                                                                                                                     305

25        Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - Record of Workshops February 2024       309

26        Hōtaka Kaupapa - Policy Schedule                                                                         323

27        Te Whakaaro ki ngā Take Pūtea e Autaia ana | Consideration of Extraordinary Items

 


1          Nau mai | Welcome

 

The meeting was opened with a karakia.

 

Whakataka te hau ki te uru

Whakataka te hau ki te tonga

Kia mākinakina ki uta 

Kia mātaratara ki tai         

E hī ake ana te atakura   

He tio 

He huka 

He hau hū  

Tīhei mauri ora

Cease o winds from the west

Cease o winds from the south

Bring calm breezes over the land

Bring calm breezes over the sea

And let the red-tipped dawn come

With a touch of frost

A sharpened air

And promise of a glorious day.

 

 

 

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 Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)         whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Tuesday, 20 February 2024, 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 Devonport-Takapuna 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       Pacific Padel - Installation of Padel Courts at Woodhall Park, Devonport

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       Julian Brown will be in attendance to address the board regarding a proposal to work with the local board to install Padel courts at Woodhall Park, Devonport.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      receive the presentation from Julian Brown on behalf of Pacific Padel and thank them for their attendance.

 

Attachments

a          Pacific Padel presentation............................................................................ 333

b          Letter of Support from Devonport Squash Club........................................... 339

 

 

 

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.”

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Decision to remove or retain the trees on Anne Street, Devonport

File No.: CP2024/02359

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.   The purpose of this report is to respond to the Notice of Motion – Request to remove trees on Anne Street, Devonport (Resolution Number DT/2023/147, 15 August 2023) and enable the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board to take a decision on whether to remove the trees.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.   At its Business Meeting on 15 August 2023, the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board received a presentation from the residents of Anne Street seeking removal of the two trees. The Board also considered a Notice of Motion (together with attachments) and resolved to request that the CEO of Auckland Council and the CEO of Auckland Transport be advised it wished to see the two trees growing in Anne Street, Devonport, be removed and replaced with two suitable native tree species.

3.   A number of factors are important in making the decision, including Regional Policy Direction; Local Policy Direction; Tree Owner Approval; Specific Arborist Advice; Healthy Waters considerations; the estimated cost of removal/replacement and Māori/community views.

4.   After careful consideration of these factors, staff recommend retaining the two trees as outlined in this report. The reasons for this relate to the contribution of the existing trees to canopy cover, the rare nature of the tree species and Healthy Waters’ advice that the removal of the trees will not rectify the flooding in the street.  Healthy Waters refers to the street's location within a flood zone and considers that the prospect of flooding will remain even with the removal of the trees.

5.   Opting to replace the trees with approximately eight native trees could potentially enhance the canopy cover on the street, resulting in a positive outcome. However, if the objective is to prevent flooding, staff advise against removing the trees, as per advice from Healthy Waters, which indicates that tree removal would not mitigate flooding in the area.

6.   If, contrary to staff advice, the local board decides to remove the trees, then staff recommend the Local Board replace the trees with eight natives to maintain the same level of canopy cover. The costs of removal and replacement would also need to be funded by the Local Board from its Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) CAPEX budget.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      note the concerns raised by Anne Street residents, correspondence received from the Tree Council and information provided in this report;

b)      note the advice provided by Healthy Waters that the two trees on Anne Street in Devonport do not cause or exacerbate flooding in the area;

c)      agree to retain the two trees on Anne Street.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.   At its business meeting held on 15 August 2023, the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board received a Notice of Motion (together with attachments) signed by Member Wood and Member Gavin Busch as seconder.

8.   At the same Business Meeting, the local board received a presentation from Peter McNab and the Residents of Anne Street concerning the two trees (Resolution Number DT/2023/145).

9.   The ‘Background’ section of the Notice of Motion stated that:

·    the two trees were Queensland Umbrella trees and therefore classified as pest trees under the Regional Pest Management Plan;

·    the trees were the cause of flooding (because their leaves blocked nearby stormwater drains, but also that the stormwater drains were not being kept clear);

·    Auckland Council arborists had decided it was inappropriate to remove the trees; and

·    Auckland Transport and Auckland Council did not have formal policies in place for the management of trees in roads.

10. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board was also provided with a document prepared by Council staff, titled ‘Notice of Motion – Supplementary Information’. Link The Supplementary Information noted the following:

·    the role of the Local Board in making decisions to remove street trees;

·    the matters to be considered in making any decision to remove street trees (which include  the regional policy framework (including the Auckland Unitary Plan), local policy framework, the requirements  in the Tree Owner Approval guide, specific arboriculture advice, flood management advice, and the estimated cost of removal and replacement of the trees).

11. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolved to request: “that the CEO of Auckland Council and the CEO of Auckland Transport be advised we wish to see the two trees growing in Anne Street, Devonport removed and replaced with two suitable native tree species” (Resolution Number DT/2023/147)

12. The statutory responsibility for managing and controlling trees on roads is held by Auckland Council and, as a consequence, no action is required from the CEO of Auckland Transport.

 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Staff have identified three reasonably practicable options for the future of the trees: retaining them, removing and replacing the two trees on a one-for-one basis, or removing and replacing them with eight new trees.

Table 1

Consideration

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

Intervention options

Removal of the two trees and replacing with two alternative native trees.

Removal of the two trees and replacing with eight alternative native trees.

Status quo – retention of the two trees.

Approximate cost

Removal of two trees including traffic control $1,500

Tree purchase and tree planting $1,000 ($500 per tree)

Two-year aftercare maintenance $1,000 ($500 per tree)

Possibility of engineering costs (alignment of kerbing) $3,000

Total $3,500 - $6,500

Removal of two trees including traffic control $1,500

Creation of engineered tree pits $200,000 to $400,000 ($25,000 to $50,000 per tree)

Tree purchase and tree planting $4,000 ($500 per tree)

Two-year aftercare maintenance $4,000 ($500 per tree)

Total $209,500 to $409,500

Total $0

Tree canopy cover

The area could be planted with shade-providing trees that have the potential to develop a larger canopy than the current trees. While this strategy promises a positive long-term outcome, it's important to note that the street will experience a temporary depletion of canopy cover until the new trees reach maturity.

Replacing the two trees with eight shade-providing trees will, in a relatively short span, confer similar ecosystem benefits to the local environment as the existing trees currently offer.

The current species (Schefflera pueckleri) is relatively rare (there are only three other known locations where this species grows in the Auckland Region) and mentioned in a book called Auckland’s Remarkable Urban Forest by Mike Wilcox.

Canopy loss

Initially, the street would experience a reduction of 99 square meters in tree canopy. Staff estimate that it would take approximately 20-30 years for the newly planted trees to reach this level of canopy coverage.

Initially, the street would experience a reduction of 99 square meters in tree canopy. Staff estimates that it would take approximately five to 10 years for the newly planted trees to reach this level of canopy coverage.

No canopy loss.

Flooding

The presence or absence of the two trees is not anticipated to have a noticeable positive effect on flooding in the area.

The presence or absence of the two trees is not anticipated to have a noticeable positive effect on flooding in the area. However, it is expected that the introduction of eight new trees would impede the rapid flow of rainwater to the ground, potentially mitigating the impact of flooding.

The retention of the trees is not anticipated to be causing or exacerbating flooding in the area.

 

Framework relating to decisions about tree removal

Regional documents

14. At a regional level, there are several key plans and policies that provide direction for the management of street trees:  

·    Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part): Chapter E17. Trees in roads Link

·    Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland's Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy Link

·    Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan Link

·    the Vegetation in the Road Corridor Guidelines Link

15. The Auckland Unitary Plan is a statutory plan made under the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘RMA’).

16. The Objectives and Policies of Chapter E17 ‘Trees in roads’ provide for the protection of trees in roads that contribute to cultural, amenity, landscape and ecological values and an increase in the quality and extent of tree cover. This is to be balanced against the safe and efficient development, maintenance, operation and upgrading of the transport system and road network.

17.  The Activity Table in Chapter E17 provides that the removal of any tree greater than 4m in height or greater than 400mm in girth in a road requires a restricted discretionary resource consent.

·    Measurement of the trees has established that the larger of the trees is greater than 4m in height and both are greater than 400mm in girth. Therefore, removal of these trees will require a restricted discretionary resource consent.

18.  Protecting mature, healthy trees is one of the principles of Auckland's Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy. Auckland's Climate Plan also requires Council to ensure that publicly managed trees are not removed without clear justification.

·    The Vegetation in the Road Corridor Guidelines provide that trees will not generally be removed from the road corridor to preserve views, remove shading or for the control of leaf litter. Removal of trees will be considered in some situations including when there are safety issues and on-going damage to infrastructure. 

Local Policy Direction

19.  The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2023 includes an objective that “Canopy coverage is increased”. Key initiatives of the Local Plan 2023 are to “Continue to support the delivery of the Devonport-Takapuna Urban Ngahere Strategy” and “Support focus on appropriate planting and having the principle of having the right tree in the right place.” One of the measures of success is “Our existing trees are protected, and our canopy cover continues to increase”. Link

Tree Owner Approval

20.  The Council Tree Owner Approval Guide Link states: “Decisions regarding removal of healthy, functioning street trees are made on a case by case basis by an Urban Forest Specialist.  In determining whether the removal of a healthy tree is warranted, council will consider:

·    The significance of the vegetation;

·    Whether the species of the tree is appropriate for its location, and whether it is a nuisance species tree;

·    Whether the tree’s crown, stem or root growth habit has developed in a manner that would prevent continued healthy growth or is negatively impacting on other tree(s);

·    The impact of removal and replanting on the neighbourhood streetscape and the public benefit.

21. Below is a brief analysis of the matters referred to in the Tree Owner Approval Guide:

·    The significance of the vegetation;

The two trees hold significance from a rarity perspective, being documented in the book 'Auckland’s Remarkable Urban Forest' by Mike Wilcox. They are reasonably rare, with only three other known locations where this species grows in the Auckland Region. Considering the absence of any other trees on the street, the local canopy loss is also deemed significant from this perspective.

·    Whether the species of the tree is appropriate for its location, and whether it is a nuisance species tree;

The perception among some residents that the tree is causing flooding was not substantiated by Healthy Waters, who advised that the street, being in a flood plain, is expected to flood with or without the presence of the trees. In terms of the appropriateness of retaining the trees, it's noteworthy that the street lacks any other public trees, and canopy cover is essential to provide multiple benefits. Additionally, the tree in question is not listed as a pest in the Regional Pest Management Plan.

·    Whether the tree’s crown, stem or root growth habit has developed in a manner that would prevent continued healthy growth or is negatively impacting on other tree(s);

Both trees are in good health and are not anticipated to pose any threats to infrastructure. There are no other trees.

·    The impact of removal and replanting on the neighborhood streetscape and the public benefit.

The removal of the two trees would result in a canopy loss of 99 square meters of tree canopy. Depending on the replacement planting choice, this canopy would be replaced in 20-30 years (if only two trees are planted) or in 5-10 years if eight trees are planted. The initial loss of the tree canopy will result in hotter road and footpath surface.

 

Specific Arborist Advice – Anne Street

22.  The tree species are 2 x Schefflera pueckleri, commonly known as mallet flower. The previous identification of the species as Schefflera actinophylla (Queensland Umbrella) was incorrect. The actual (correct species) is not listed in the Regional Pest Management Plan.

23.  The trees on Anne Street are mentioned in a book called Auckland’s Remarkable Urban Forest by Mike Wilcox and are reasonably rare (there are only three other known locations where this species grows in the Auckland Region).

24.  Both trees are mature and healthy trees. They are currently the only street trees in Anne Street and provide ecosystem benefits, including shading of the road surface, rain interception (slowing rain getting into the stormwater system), stormwater uptake (removing moisture from soils), carbon sequestration, air pollutant removal, oxygen production and bird habitat.

 

25.  The existing trees have a combined canopy cover of 99m2 (44m2, 55m2).

26.  The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area currently has a canopy cover of 16%, however one of the goals in the Auckland's Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy  being to achieve 30% across the region by 2050. Removal of these trees will set back the achievement of that goal.

27. If a decision is made to remove the two trees in this street, in order to maintain the current progress toward achieving the canopy cover goal, it is recommended that funding be allocated to construct eight new tree pits in Anne Street to accommodate eight new large-grade trees.

28. This will provide, in a relatively short space of time, similar ecosystem benefits to the local environment that the existing trees provide. It is noted that the Local Board resolution (DT/2023/147) referred to two suitable native tree species. In order to provide the same benefits that the existing trees give, 8 trees will be required to replace the two existing mature trees.

Healthy Waters Considerations – Anne Street

29.  Healthy Waters advise that flooding in the area will occur with or without the trees being present. The area has been classified as a flood plain (areas predicted to be covered by flood water during large rainfall events).

30.  Anne Street is a low-lying street not much higher than the sea level, with a stormwater system that disperses into the sea. There is no permeable surface in Anne Street (except the tree pits), meaning that rainfall does not soak into the ground and has to run off into the stormwater system. When it is high tide, stormwater cannot flow into the sea, causing flooding during rain events.

 

31.  Healthy Waters advise that there are currently four catchpits outside 14 Anne Street and these catchpits have been placed on a ‘hotspot cleaning register’, which is the highest frequency available for catchpit cleaning.

32.  This means Healthy Waters will clean the catchpit grills routinely once a month, as well as, before and after any heavy rain event. Healthy Waters anticipates that this will help decrease flooding frequency. However it will not remove the risk of the grills being re-blocked (when new debris, for example, washes onto the grills during a weather event).

33.  Healthy Waters has also identified that the pipework in this area needs upgrading taking increased rainfall due to climate change and sea level rise into consideration, and their project team are currently in the early planning stages for a network improvement to increase pipe capacity. This is, however, only at a very early stage that involves assessing options.

34. Healthy Waters are currently in concept design (investigating options) for Anne Street, Huia Street, Spring Street, Queens parade, Garden Terrace, Kapai Road, Wynyard Street and Clarence Street and anticipates to be able to share the results in July 2024.

Community views

35.  As noted above, at its 15 August 2023 meeting, the Local Board received a presentation from Peter McNab and the Residents of Anne Street concerning their desire to have the two trees removed. The Notice of Motion also included several media articles expressing local resident views.

36. On 24 August 2023, the Local Board received a letter from The Tree Council in response to the notice of motion regarding the removal of two street trees on Anne Street. The Tree Council strongly opposes the removal of the two trees and highlights several inaccuracies in the evidence presented. The identified trees, described as Queensland Umbrella Trees, are clarified as Umbrella Trees (were Schefflera pueckleri now Heptapleurum calyptratum), emphasizing their rarity and regional importance. The letter disputes claims that these trees are causing flooding, arguing that Anne Street is naturally flood-prone due to its low-lying location and stormwater drainage issues. The Tree Council underscores Auckland Council's policies, including the Urban Ngahere Strategy, which encourages increased canopy coverage. Removal of these mature trees would diminish the current canopy coverage in the area, necessitating costly replanting efforts. Additionally, the letter notes legal protections for street trees under the Unitary Plan and Resource Management Act, emphasizing the public support for urban tree protection. The Tree Council urges the Local Board to reconsider its decision, emphasizing the myriad benefits provided by the trees, and requests the Council's Asset Manager to consider these factors in the decision-making process.

37.  From its regular community engagement, Auckland Council is aware that many in the community value mature trees and support their protection where possible.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

38. Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan supports the protection of important trees and seeks to ensure that publicly managed trees are not removed without clear justification.[1] Auckland's Climate Plan also supports Auckland's Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy.

39. The tree removal can be mitigated by the planting of eight new native trees in Anne Street.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

40. The Auckland Council group has a well-developed strategic framework and set of policies that guide decision-making when considering the potential removal of mature trees, including:

a.   the Auckland Unitary Plan (Operative in part): Chapter E17. Trees in roads;

b.   Te Rautaki Ngahere ā-Tāone o Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland's Urban Ngahere (Forest) Strategy;

c.   Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan; and the Vegetation in the Road Corridor Guidelines.

41. These Auckland Council group strategies and policies have been considered by the Community Facilities staff when making the recommendation in this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

42. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2023 includes an objective that “Canopy coverage is increased”. Key initiatives of the Local Plan 2023 are to “Continue to support the delivery of the Devonport-Takapuna Urban Ngahere Strategy” and “Support focus on appropriate planting and the principle of having the right tree in the right place.” One of the measures of success is “Our existing trees are protected, and our canopy cover continues to increase”.

43. These Local Board Plans have been considered as part of the decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

44. At this point, no consultation has been undertaken with iwi. If the decision is made to remove the two trees then the engagement with Mana Whenua would unfold as part of the resource consent application process (resource consent is required for removal of the two trees).

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

45. In the ‘Notice of Motion – Supplementary Information’ Link it was initially estimated it would cost approximately $3,500 to remove the two trees (including stump removals) and approximately $45,000 to replace the trees.

46. Following a comprehensive analysis, the staff has revisited the costings and presented updated estimates, categorized by the necessity for engineering intervention. The detailed cost breakdown is outlined in table one. The projected cost for the removal of the two trees and replanting in the same spots, without engineering intervention, is estimated at $3,500. However, if engineering intervention becomes necessary, the costs would escalate based on the number of required tree pits. The construction cost for one tree pit is anticipated to range between $25,000 and $50,000, contingent upon underground conditions such as the presence of underground services.

47. As the request to remove the trees is being made by the Local Board, the costs of removal and replacement would also need to be funded by the Local Board from its Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) CAPEX budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

48. There is a likelihood that a decision to either remove or retain the trees will attract the attention of members of public. This risk will be mitigated by prior communications and additional measures to engage with the community.

49. The risk of the street flooding during floods remains present whether the trees stay or are removed due to the presence of the street in a flood plain. Some review of the improvements that could be made may be warranted although this would need to be assessed by the Healthy Waters Department in consideration of regional priorities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

50. Following the local board’s decision, staff will advise residents of the decision.

51. If a decision is taken to remove the trees, staff will need to engage with Mana Whenua and obtain resource consent (pending Mana Whenua feedback).

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

David Stejskal, Regional Arboriculture and Ecological Manager

Authorisers

Martin van Jaarsveld, Head of Specialist Operations

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

a)      whakaae / agree to exclude the public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

 

12        9 Kitchener Road - Attachment a - CONFIDENTIAL

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

In particular, the report contains commercially sensitive information including the final sale proposal from the owners of Kitchener Road and valuations of the property. Publicising this information could prejudice negotiations.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

In particular, the report contains commercially sensitive information including the final sale proposal from the owners of Kitchener Road and valuations of the property. Publicising this information could prejudice negotiations.

s48(1)(a)

The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists under section 7.

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

9 Kitchener Road

File No.: CP2024/02166

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To confirm direction from Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna / Devonport-Takapuna Local Board relating to the purchase of 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna, and public access to the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The owners of 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna, have historically allowed informal access across their property to members of the public as part of the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway.

3.       Staff have undertaken investigations and attempts to formally agree a solution with the owners of the property which provides public through-access across the property.

4.       On 29 September 2023, after ongoing negotiations failed to eventuate in a mutually agreeable outcome, public access over the land at 9 Kitchener Road was closed by the property owners.

5.       A final non-negotiable conditional proposal to sell the property was made by the property owners of 9 Kitchener Road to Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland Council in December 2023.

6.       The owners and the council have been unable to agree on the value of the property and sale conditions.

7.       Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna do not currently have sufficient capital funding available to meet the owners’ asking price.

8.       The building and surrounds are of historical importance and in a delipidated condition requiring significant levels of investment.

9.       No funding to acquire and maintain the property has been allocated or considered in either the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 (Recovery Budget), Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna 2023/2024 capital work programme or the draft Long-term Plan 2024-2034.

10.     Staff recommend that council should withdraw from any further negotiations with the property owners, formalise the less desirable road walkway detour, and reserve the right to negotiate access opportunities with any future owners of the property.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that despite ongoing negotiations between Auckland Council and the property owners, no formal agreement has been reached to ensure continual public access along the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway over the 9 Kitchener Road property.

b)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that there is no planned or programmed budget considered in the council’s 10-year Budget 2021-2031 (Recovery Budget) or draft Long-term Plan 2024-2034 to accommodate the cost and conditional requirements of the property owners’ non-negotiable final offer to purchase the property.

c)      whakaae / agree to decline the current offer to purchase 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna.

d)      whakaae / agree to withdraw from any further negotiations with the current property owners of 9 Kitchener Road.

e)      whakaae / accept that the property owners’ timeline does not allow for alternative funding options, including service property optimisation or a targeted rate, to be progressed.

f)       whakaae / accept that upon the council’s withdrawal from any further negotiations, the property may be offered for sale on the open market.

g)      tono / request that Parks and Community Facilities staff install and maintain permanent signposting for the walkway detour via footpaths on Audrey Lane, Kitchener Road, Hurstmere Road, and Minnehaha Avenue.

h)      ohia / confirm that the local board reserves the right to negotiate public access options with any future owner/s of the 9 Kitchener Road property.

Horopaki

Context

11.     Local boards have decision-making responsibilities for:[2]

·    the number of new local parks and their specific location within budget parameters agreed with the Governing Body

·    the number of new local community facilities and their specific location, design, build and fit out within budget parameters agreed with the Governing Body.

12.     9 Kitchener Road is a privately owned residential property on a 1072m² coastal foreshore site. It is adjacent to the council owned reserve at R21 Tiri Road (Thornes Bay).

13.     Under the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP), operational in part, the property is zoned Residential - Single House. 9 Kitchener Road, ‘The Clifton Firth Residence’ (ID 2683) is a Category A[3] heritage schedule place under the AUP, with interiors excluded.

14.     The informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway comprises of paved promenade, beach, and lava rocks in the coastal marine area, as well as legal road, and paths atop underground Watercare Services Limited infrastructure. The route crosses up to 72 private properties, with boundaries that lie at or below the mean high water spring level. No formal legal rights for public access across these private properties exist. The path is not owned or maintained by the council.

15.     In 2012, following storm damage and the removal of a section of coastal boardwalk, Auckland Council’s Regional Development and Operations Committee directed staff to negotiate with several property owners to formalise public access across their land. The negotiations included access over the ‘toe’ of the property at 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna.

Image 1: 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna. Red dash line shows walkway access.

16.     Negotiations originally focused on access through the addition of an ‘easement’ over the property but were declined by the property owner.

17.     In 2018, a Heads of Agreement (HoA) proposal for 9 Kitchener Road was agreed to by the council and the property owner. Subject to approval the HoA proposed a sale of the entire 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna site to the council at 50 per cent of the property’s market value, with conditions that the council restore the property and use it as an ‘artists-in-residence facility’.

18.     In 2021, the resident owner passed away. Negotiations stalled in 2023 due to the inability of the beneficiaries and the council to agree on the property’s market value.

19.     In August 2023, the property beneficiaries’ representative submitted a revised set of conditions to the 2018 agreement. The alternate proposal was for the owners to transfer a public access easement right to the council subject to conditions. These included a requirement for the council to remove the heritage protection of the property, create a dividing wall, to formalise vehicular access from Audrey Lane and write off rates arrears.

20.     As those full conditions were not met by 29 September 2023, the owners closed public access across the property.

21.     A comprehensive timeline and options were provided to Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna in October 2023 (resolution DT/2023/183) and to the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee in November 2023 (resolution PEPCC/2023/164).

22.     Key resolutions, from the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee hui of 30 November 2023 are:

·    Council will not initiate a plan change to remove the historic heritage place protection.

·    The 2018 HoA be revoked and any further negotiations in accordance with the HoA conditions be ceased.

·    Any unbudgeted spend will be a Governing Body decision.

·    Staff support Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna in considering further options.

·    A request to the owners be made to remove the fence in good faith while discussions are ongoing.

23.     On 20 December 2023, a final non-negotiable conditional proposal was made to the council by the property owners (refer Attachment A).

24.     Staff attended a workshop with Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna on 29 February 2024, where the current status, implications, and considerations were summarised (refer Attachment B). Direction was provided on possible next steps.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

A 2024 property valuation is less than previous valuations and the current capital value

25.     Valuations, were undertaken by a registered valuer, in October 2018, February 2022, and January 2024 (refer Attachment A).

26.     The owners of the property have not provided a current independent valuation and have stated their preference for using the current Council capital value (used for 2023/2024 rates) of $6.81 million.

27.     The sizable discrepancy between the current capital value and the latest valuation has contributed to the inability for the council and owners to agree on a sale price.

Funding is not available in time to meet the conditions of the owners’ latest sale proposal

28.     Staff have investigated several ways to fund the purchase of 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna.

Sale proceeds from 2 The Strand

29.     Staff have investigated the potential allocation of proceeds from the sale of 2 The Strand, Takapuna, toward the acquisition of the property.

30.     Net sale proceeds from 2 The Strand are approximately $3.1 million. The sale proceeds are insufficient to meet or match the final non-negotiable conditional offer (refer Attachment A).

Service property optimisation

31.     Staff reviewed 383 properties to identify funding sources. Two high-level potential opportunities were found, with a combined indicative value of $1 million. Further mahi and engagement with stakeholders and the local board is required to confirm suitability which would take approximately 12 months. Sale proceeds would not be available in time to meet the property owners’ deadline of February 2024.

Targeted rate

32.     The implementation of a targeted rate is a legislative process. The process requires the proposed rates activity be assessed against multiple criteria and must be included in an annual or 10-year budget. This process could not be completed in time to meet the property owners’ deadline.

33.     None of the three funding opportunities mentioned above would allow the local board to meet the timing and/or financial conditions outlined in the owners’ latest sale proposal.

There are confirmed and possible limitations to how the property can be used

34.     Accepting the current sale proposal or using sale proceeds from 2 The Strand would limit how the property can be used.

35.     The latest sale proposal includes conditions on how the property is used. The cottage would have to be used ‘for public use by council into the future in perpetuity’.

36.     2 The Strand is an endowment. As an endowment property, the proceeds of the sale are required to be utilised for ‘municipal purposes’[4]. Purchase for a coastal walkway is consistent with the purpose of the endowment, purchase of an easement is not consistent with the purpose of the endowment. The whole of the property (including the existing cottage) would need to be utilised for municipal purposes, it cannot be held without a defined purpose.

37.     The conditions outlined in the sale proposal and endowment would restrict how the property can be used, including:

·    what services can be offered from the site

·    sub-division opportunities

·    council’s ability to divest of the property in the future

·    commercial revenue opportunities.

38.     These restrictions on how the property can be used are additional to those already in place through the Auckland Unitary Plan.

·    Relocation of the building, off site, is a prohibited activity. A consent for this activity cannot be applied for.

·    Planning requirements and zoning would influence future commercial options and decision making.

An additional heritage asset would put further pressure on the board’s available budget

39.     Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna already has a vacant heritage facility, in its portfolio (Kennedy Park), that has not been restored or used since its purchase.

40.     The building at 9 Kitchener Road has been assessed by independent surveyors as being dilapidated and requiring significant capital investment to restore it to a safe, sanitary, and fit for purpose condition. Hard landscaping works are also required across the property gardens to provide safe access.

41.     The purchase of 9 Kitchener Road would add another heritage facility to the local board’s portfolio. The building restoration, ongoing maintenance, and operational costs are unbudgeted.

42.     The 10-year Budget 2024-2034 is currently open for public consultation. Staff cannot confirm what capital or operational budgets will be available to local boards from the next financial year until the budget is adopted. Within the 10-year Budget 2024-2034 there is a proposed change to local board funding equity which will require some local boards, including Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna, to change how they manage their asset portfolios.

Other considerations

43.     The proceeds from the sale of 2 The Strand are currently planned and programmed for the local board priority project Takapuna Library and Community Centre. Reallocation of the proceeds of sale would result in work on this project being paused until other funding could be sourced.

44.     The informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway crosses up to 72 private properties, with boundaries that lie at or below the mean high water spring level. Although the property is recognised as a “pinch point” on the walkway, the acquisition of the property could be considered as precedent setting for other local or regional walkways where informal public access is currently enjoyed over private property.

45.     Investment to deliver a potential easement option is not considered in the current local board work programme. Should the local board wish to consider this, several identified LDI Capex projects could be deferred or delayed as part of finalising their local board work programme for 2024/2025 (refer Attachment A).

Advice

46.     Staff advise that the proposed property acquisition is not a provision priority, that there are significant budgetary considerations, risk inherent in potential precedent setting, and uncertainty regarding the future allocation of funds through the proposed Long-term Plan 2024-2034, including the fairer funding budget scenarios.

47.     Staff advice therefore remains consistent in recommending not to purchase the 9 Kitchener Road property or an easement across the property and to:

·    formally decline the current sale proposal, noting that the property will subsequently be offered on the open market

·    install permanent signage offering a detour through Audrey Lane and Minnehaha Avenue

·    reserve the right to negotiate access with new owners.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

48.     The council’s climate goals as set out in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan are to:

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

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

49.     As shown by the 2011 storm event, the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway route is vulnerable to future coastal inundation and storm surge events.

50.     Legalising or acquiring any privately owned properties along the route, including 9 Kitchener Road, will increase the council’s exposure and liability to climate change risk. This risk comes with associated holding and operational costs, damage, repair, and replacement costs in an area where the physical options for walkway construction and management are already constrained.

51.     9 Kitchener Road is not in a flood prone area. A known 100-year rainfall event overland flow path may impact the northern part of the property. This is identified on the council’s Geomaps, as is the predicted inundation of the property’s coastal edge in the scenario of a two-metre sea level rise over 50 years.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

52.     All relevant council departments and Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) have been engaged on an ongoing basis since 2010 regarding legalising the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway, including securing public access across privately owned properties along the route.

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

Local impacts and local board views

53.     Staff have consulted with Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna regarding the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway since 2010.

54.     The local board resolved on 6 March 2012 (resolution number DT/2012/75) that it supported progressing the formalisation of the coastal walkway.

55.     Following the council’s indicative approval to dispose of the endowment property at 2 The Strand, Takapuna in July 2020, and specifically allocate the proceeds of sale, Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna resolved on 1 December 2020 (resolution number DT/2020/186) that it supports the acquisition of 9 Kitchener Road for open space purposes.

56.     In 2020, Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna also resolved (resolution numbers DT/2020/187, DT/2020/188, DT/2020/189, DT/2020/190, DT/2020/191 and DT/2020/192) requesting:

·    an update from council departments and Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) regarding acquisition progress and timeframes

·    information if sales proceeds from the sale of the endowment property at 2 The Strand, Takapuna, could be used to acquire 9 Kitchener Road

·    that ongoing dialogue continue between the council and the owners of 9 Kitchener Road

·    that the local board resolutions and supporting information be forwarded to the relevant Governing Body committee

·    that Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna Chairperson requests speaking rights when the matter is considered by the relevant council committee.

57.     The local board further resolved on 17 August 2021 (resolution number DT/2021/122) that the acquisition of public access across 9 Kitchener Road be the second ranked proposed priority option for the use of any sales proceeds from the sale of the endowment property at 2 The Strand, Takapuna.

58.     Parks and Community Facilities staff provided the local board with an update regarding the property and history of negotiations. They also responded to the December 2020 and August 2021 resolutions at a workshop held on 1 August 2023.

59.     On 17 October 2023 the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board made a number of resolutions, (DT/2023/183) including:

·    concerns that a replacement walkway for the section destroyed in 2011 has not progressed

·    request for involvement in discussions for options to secure public access along the informal Takapuna-Milford coastal walkway route

·    acknowledgement that no budget is available in the current Long-term Plan (LTP) and request for budget to be allocated in the upcoming LTP to develop a preferred final option

·    that if any acquisition is made, it will become a local board asset and requirement local board capital and operating budgets

·    support for involving the Te Araroa Trust and the Outdoor Access Commission in discussions

·    maintaining ongoing negotiations in good faith with the owners of 9 Kitchener Road, Takapuna.

60.     A comprehensive timeline, options, and update report was provided to the local board in October 2023 (resolution DT/2023/183), with a subsequent workshop on 29 February 2024 (refer Attachment B).

61.     This report provides the local board with an opportunity to confirm its position regarding 9 Kitchener Road.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

62.     Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations to Māori. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, Whiria Te Muka Tangata Māori Responsiveness Framework, and Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau - Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework.

63.     9 Kitchener Road is likely to be within the boundaries of land originally acquired by the Crown from Māori from 1841 to 1844, through a series of historical land purchases.

64.     Ngāti Paoa has previously advised Auckland Council that the Ngāti Paoa Treaty deed of settlement for historical claims includes an acknowledgement from the Crown for the Crown’s historic failings regarding the assessment and acquisition of Ngāti Paoa held land, including land in the 1840’s era Takapuna block that was acquired by European settlers prior to the Treaty signing, and for land subsequently acquired by the Crown.

65.     Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki has previously advised Auckland Council that the wider Takapuna area holds cultural significance. Takapuna is named after a spring near Maunga-a-Uika (North Head) and a place where many Ngāi Tai ancestors were also named the same, none more so than Takapuna Hetaraka.

66.     The provision of quality parks and open spaces has broad benefits for Māori, including:

·    helping facilitate Māori participation in outdoor recreational activity

·    helping make Auckland a green, resilient, and healthy environment consistent with the Māori world view of the natural world and their role as kaitiaki of the natural environment.

67.     Mana whenua have been consulted regarding the provision of open space in Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna area as part of the development of the following plans.

·    Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2011

·    Devonport-Takapuna Greenways Plan 2015

·    Devonport-Takapuna Open Space Network Plan 2019.

68.     Te Ākitai Waiohua has previously advised Auckland Council it has an interest in the wider Waiwharariki (Takapuna) and lake Pupukemoana (Lake Pupuke) area. A statutory acknowledgement for the adjacent Thornes Bay Recreation Reserve is in the Te Ākitai Waiohua Treaty deed of settlement.

69.     Should the council progress the securing of public access across 9 Kitchener Road and other private properties along the route of the informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway, mana whenua will be consulted as a priority, and as any part of subsequent formalisation and improvements to council owned land.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

70.     Budget to either acquire the entire property, or an easement by negotiation, the undertaking of urgent repairs to the cottage, and ongoing consequential maintenance is not contemplated in the 10-year Budget 2021-2031 (Recovery Budget), nor included in the draft Long-term Plan 2024-2034. Any unbudgeted spend would need to be funded through reprioritisation of local board projects or a request by the Local Board to the Governing Body for increased funding.

71.     Additional to acquisition, costs to restore the building are estimated to be approximately $800,000, based on a 2018 condition assessment and including inflation. Estimated ongoing operational costs to maintain the property would be approximately $40,000 to $60,000 per year.

72.     The 10-year Budget 2024-2034 proposes a change to local board funding based on a Fairer Funding model. The model proposes to address local community services funding inequities by distributing available funding to boards based on population (80 per cent) deprivation (15 per cent) and land area (five per cent). This distribution model was approved (GB/2021/138) by the Governing Body as the equitable funding model.

73.     This means that, when compared to the current asset-based funding model, some local boards will receive more funding for local community services, while others will receive less. Local boards will need to make informed decisions on where to prioritise investment in their service property portfolio to provide the best outcomes for their community.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

74.     The informal Takapuna to Milford coastal walkway is not a council owned or maintained pathway which poses health and safety risks and hazards to the public.

75.     The council is in the process of removing the route as a walkway in the local board greenways interim review. Signage on the Watercare pump station, on the council owned reserve at R 21 Tiri Road (Thornes Bay), warns the public that the route requires a reasonable level of fitness, and is not suitable for prams or unsupervised children.

76.     Council information signage has been placed at key intersections advising walkway users that an alternate route on formed legal road is available via footpaths on Audrey Lane, Kitchener Road, Hurstmere Road, and Minnehaha Avenue to return to the coastal walkway.

77.     There is a reputational risk that the community perceives the walkway as a council asset and that council’s action, or inaction, will not align with community expectations of full and unobstructed access along the walkway. Staff recommend the release of communications timed to coincide with any key decisions to provide the public with clarity on the council’s position and why.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

78.     Next steps are now subject to the content of this report, consideration of staff advice, and receipt of the local board’s resolution/s.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

CONFIDENTIAL - Confidential

 

b

Workshop presentation to Te Poari ā-Rohe o Devonport-Takapuna 29 February 2024

29

     

 

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Hannah Alleyne - Service & Asset Planning Team Leader

Authorisers

Taryn Crewe - General Manager Parks and Community Facilities

Justine Haves - General Manager Regional Services & Strategy

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


























Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Proposed new community ground lease for Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated at Stanley Bay Park, Stanley Point

File No.: CP2024/00305

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval to grant a new community ground lease to Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated for its building and improvements, including the five adjacent tennis courts and floodlights located at Stanley Bay Park, R 166 Calliope Road, Stanley Point.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated seeks a new community ground lease to continue occupation and operation from the club-owned building and improvements, including the five adjacent tennis courts and floodlights at Stanley Bay Park, R 166 Calliope Road, Stanley Point.

3.       The club currently holds an existing community ground lease which has passed the final expiry of 30 September 2021. The lease is holding over on a month-to-month basis on the same terms and conditions until terminated or a new lease is granted.

4.       The new lease was identified and approved by the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board as part of the Customer and Community Services: Community Leases Work Programme 2023/2024 at its 18 July 2023 local board meeting (resolution number DT/2023/134).

5.       The aim of the club is to promote and facilitate the game of tennis for individuals of all ages and abilities. These activities predominantly align with the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2023 outcomes below:

·        Tō Tātou Taiao / Our Environment

·        O Tātou Tāngata / Our People

·        Tō Tātou Hapori / Our Community and Facilities.

6.       The club has provided all required information, including financials showing that it has sufficient funds and is being managed appropriately. It has all the necessary insurance cover, including public liability and building insurance in place.

7.       In accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, community organisations that own their buildings have an automatic right to re‑apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. This right is being exercised by the club through the application for a new lease.

8.       On 8 June 2023, the Annual Budget was approved by the council’s Governing Body, which included amendments to the Community Occupancy Guidelines. The amendments increased the rent fee for a ground lease from $1.00 plus goods and services tax (GST) per annum if demanded to $1,300.00 plus GST per annum taking effect from 1 July 2023 (resolution number GB/2023/101).

9.       Given that the club applied for the proposed new lease in October 2021, prior to the Annual Budget amendments, staff recommend that the rental be $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded in accordance with the guidelines operative at the time of the application.

10.     To maintain alignment with the revised Community Occupancy Guidelines, staff have recommended a phased approach and that the rent be reviewed within five years of the commencement date. This will give the club an opportunity to develop a reserve fund to meet the revised rental charges.

11.     Staff undertook a site visit on the 11 May 2023. The facility is well maintained, and the club have a maintenance plan to ensure the facility is well looked after. Over the coming year, the club intends to upgrade its toilets and changing rooms.

12.     A Community Outcomes Plan has been agreed upon with the club in order to determine the community benefits it will provide. This will be appended as a schedule to the lease agreement.

13.     The club’s primary activity is contemplated in the adopted Devonport Borough Council Operative Reserve Management Plans 1989, therefore mana whenua engagement and public notification on the proposed new lease is not required.

14.     Staff have consulted with subject matter experts within the council and are supportive of a new lease to the club.

15.     Climate change has the potential to affect the club’s premises as it is located in a flood-prone or coastal inundation zone. Nonetheless, the clubhouse floor is elevated approximately 500 millimetres above ground, and the club is not aware of any past flooding events involving the clubhouse, including Auckland's most severe storms to date.

16.     The club additionally stated that it would continue to enhance the clubhouse's resilience to ensure that it operates continuously by making ongoing asset upgrades and maintenance, thereby reducing any possible risks to it in the future. Furthermore, the courts have been raised and covered in artificial turf to provide effective drainage during heavy rains.

17.     This report recommends that a new ground lease be granted to the club for a term of 10 years with one 10-year right of renewal (20-year total term), in accordance with the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977 and the Local Government Act 2002, as well as the terms and conditions under the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      tuku / grant, under section 54(1)(b) of the Reserves Act 1977 and section 138 of the Local Government Act 2002, a new community ground lease for Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated for approximately 2,825 square metres (more or less) located at Stanley Bay Park, R 166 Calliope Road, Stanley Point on the land legally described as Part Harbour Bed Deposited Plan 15479, comprised in record of title NA353/180 and Part Lot 159 Allotment 31 Section 2 Parish of Takapuna, comprised in record of title NA566/80 (as per Figure 1 and Attachment A – Site Plan), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i)    term – 10 years commencing 19 March 2024, with one (1) 10-year right of renewal commencing 19 March 2034, effecting final expiry on 18 March 2044

ii)   rent – $1.00 plus goods and services tax per annum if demanded

iii)   rent review – five (5) years, on the fifth anniversary of the commencement date, and thereafter in accordance with the standard rent review provisions for community leases

iv)  community outcomes plan to be appended to the lease as a schedule of the lease agreement (as per Attachment B – Community Outcomes Plan).

b)      whakaae / approve all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 (Updated July 2023) and the Auckland Council standard form community lease agreement.

Horopaki

Context

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

19.     The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services: Community Leases Work Programme 2023/2024 at their local board meeting on 18 July 2023 (resolution number DT/2023/134).

20.     The progression of this new lease proposal for Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated at Stanley Bay Park, R 166 Calliope Road, Stanley Point is part of the approved work programme. This report considers the new community ground lease as approved on the work programme.

Land, building/s and lease

21.     Stanley Bay Park is located at R 166 Calliope Road, Stanley Point (refer to Figure 1 and Attachment A - Site Plan). The underlying land of the new lease proposal is legally described as:

·        Part Harbour Bed Deposited Plan 15479, comprised in record of title NA353/180 (North Auckland Registry), and held in fee simple by Auckland Council as a classified recreation reserve subject to Reserves Act 1977, and

·        Part Lot 159 Allotment 31 Section 2 Parish of Takapuna, comprised in record of title NA566/80 (North Auckland Registry), and held in fee simple by Auckland Council subject to the Local Government Act 2002.

22.     Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated holds an existing community ground lease for the club-owned building and improvements, including the five adjacent tennis courts and floodlights. The proposed leased areas is approximately 2,825 square metres (more or less) delineated in red below.

 

Figure 1: Site Plan – Stanley Bay Park delineated in cyan, leased areas for the club delineated in red

 

23.     For a club-owned building, all operational and maintenance costs are borne by the leaseholder. These costs are funded from membership fees, fundraising, coaching, donations, as well as external funding, to mention a few.

24.     The club has recently completed upgrading its outside court lights with light-emitting diode (LED) lights and is planning its next project. This will entail upgrading both sets of changing rooms and toilets.

25.     The building is primarily used by the club to facilitate the game of tennis.

Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated

26.     The club was established in 1927, and its primary purpose is to provide facilities to promote the game of tennis. A family-oriented club with a proud heritage, it was selected Tennis Northern's club of the year for 2020/2021.

27.     It is affiliated with Tennis Northern and Tennis NZ, and its governance structure is robust.

28.     It has more than 300 members, and its five lit courts are available seven days a week. To promote casual users, the club has installed a book-a-court system that allows them to play at any time.

29.     The club boasts a large number of juniors, as well as expert instructors who provide coaching to players of all levels and ages. It has strong ties with local primary schools in the area, notably Stanley Bay, St Leo's Catholic, and Vauxhall. In 2027, the club will commemorate its centennial anniversary.

30      Its current community ground lease with the council commenced on 1 October 2001 with a final expiry date of 30 September 2021. The lease to the club is holding over on a month-to-month basis on the same terms and conditions until terminated or a new lease is formalised.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

31.     Under the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, community organisations that own their own buildings have an automatic right to re‑apply for a new lease at the end of their occupancy term. The club is exercising this right by applying for a new lease. The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board has discretion to vary the term of the lease if it wishes. However, the Community Occupancy Guidelines suggest that where the term is varied, it aligns to one of the recommended terms.

Public notification and engagement

32.     The primary activity of the club is contemplated in the adopted Devonport Borough Council Operative Reserve Management Plans 1989, consequently engagement with mana whenua and public notification on the proposed new lease are not required.

Assessment of the application

33.     The club has submitted a comprehensive application supporting the new lease proposal and is able to demonstrate its ability to deliver the sport of tennis.

34.     It has provided financials which show that accounting records are being kept, funds are being managed appropriately and there are sufficient funds to meet liabilities.

35.     The club has all necessary insurance cover, including building and public liability insurance, in place.

36.     It has a maintenance schedule in place to meet the necessary building renewals and general maintenance required for the facility's upkeep and longevity. All management and operational costs are funded by the club.

37.     Staff conducted a site visit on 11 May 2023, and the facility is well managed and maintained, and in reasonably good condition given the facility's age.

38.     The club have also undertaken improvements such as:

·        new light-emitting diode (LED) court lights

·        book-a-court system

·        upstairs deck has been inspected and repairs have been made to ensure its continued safety

·        installed smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, and have implemented a no-smoking policy, and

·        it also anticipates upgrading its changing rooms and toilets in the near future.

39.     It provides a valuable service to the local community and beyond by providing well-maintained and well-used tennis courts and clubrooms. In addition, Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated is the only tennis club in the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board's community occupancy portfolio that serves residents of Stanley Point and the surrounding communities.

40.     The area proposed to be leased to the club consists of approximately 2,825 square metres (more or less) and is delineated in red on Attachment A.

41.     A Community Outcomes Plan has been developed to identify the benefits that the club will provide to the community. This will be attached as a schedule to the lease agreement and to the report as Attachment B.

42.     Staff recommend that a new community ground lease be granted to Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated for a term of 10 years commencing from 19 March 2024 with one 10-year right of renewal, effecting final expiry on 18 March 2044.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

43.     Climate change has the potential to impact the lease, as the leased area is located in a flood-sensitive or coastal inundation zone as illustrated in the excerpt below.

44.     The club has been advised by staff that its facility is significantly vulnerable to the potential impacts of climate change. According to the club, the clubhouse floor is raised approximately 500 millimetres above ground level. The council constructed a stormwater manhole and piping infrastructure behind the clubhouse to manage water from the properties above it. Additionally, the club is not aware of any previous flooding incidents involving the clubhouse.

45.     Moreover, the club has invested in building upgrades, and it is determined to address any stormwater issues and will continue to monitor the situation. The courts have been elevated and covered with astroturf for efficient drainage during heavy rains.

46.     The club further stated that it would continue to enhance the clubhouse's resilience to guarantee its continued operation through ongoing asset improvements and maintenance, consequently mitigating any potential future risks to it.

Figure 2: Flood Viewer – The club’s premises circled in red

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

·        use sustainable waste, energy and water efficiency systems

·        use eco labelled products and services

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

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

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

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

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

49.     Subject matter experts within the council such as the Community Broker, Lead Financial Advisor, Parks and Places Specialist, as well as the Sports and Recreation Lead, have been consulted. They are supportive of the proposed new lease to the club.

50.     In addition, Healthy Waters have relayed the following information regarding the club's occupancy in a flood-prone location:

·        the current model predicted the flood level 10-year Annual Recurrence Interval (ARI) for Maximum Probable Development (MPD) land use and increased rainfall due to climate change is approximately 2.21m (metres) Reduced Level. The flood depth varies from 0.1m to 0.4m. Refer to the map below.

Figure 3: Healthy Waters

·        the current model predicted the flood level for 100-year ARI for MPD land use and increased rainfall due to climate change is approximately 2.3m Reduced Level. The flood depth varies from 0.2m to 0.6m. Refer to the map below.

Figure 4: Healthy Waters

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

52.     The proposed lease will benefit the community by enabling initiatives that promote and enhance tennis and related activities, as well as a variety of sport and recreation, and health and well-being initiatives that are delivered from the facility for the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area and its surrounding communities.

53.     The local board has been updated on the lease proposal, conveying the next steps as specified in the Parks and Community Facilities Department local board report for May 2023 and forwarded to the board in June 2023. Furthermore, the assessment of the application was workshopped with the local board on 10 October 2023. The local board indicated its support, in principle, of the new lease proposal.

54.     The delivered activities predominantly align with the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Plan 2023 outcomes and objectives as shown below:

Table 1: 2023-2026 Local Board Plan outcomes and objectives

Outcome

Objective

Tō Tātou Taiao / Our Environment

Our natural and built spaces are cared for and we put water quality and the environment front and centre.

O Tātou Tāngata / Our People

We value inclusivity, diversity, and resilience.

Tō Tātou Hapori / Our Community and Facilities

Our community has access to quality services in facilities that meet their needs.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

55.     Te Kaunihera o Tāmaki Makaurau is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its statutory obligations and relationship commitments to Māori. The council recognises these responsibilities are distinct from the Crown’s Treaty obligations and fall within a local government Tāmaki Makaurau context.

56.     These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents such as the Auckland Plan 2050, the 10-year Budget Plan 2021-2031, the Auckland Unitary Plan, individual local board plans and in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, the council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework.

57.     Community leasing aims to increase Māori wellbeing through targeted support for Māori community development projects.

58.     The club has agreed, through the Community Outcomes Plan, to deliver Māori Outcomes that reflect their local community as per Attachment B of this report. The lease will benefit Māori and the wider community through health and wellbeing benefits.

59.     In addition, the club is adjacent to the Royal New Zealand Navy's operational headquarters at Devonport Naval's main base north yard. The navy has approximately 2000 personnel in the area, 20 per cent of whom identify as Māori. Personnel and their whānau are invited and welcomed to attend both on-court games and social events, such as the club's Christmas picnic.

60.     Furthermore, the club has an informal manaakitanga / kindness and generosity group to assist visitors. Each year, the club marks Te Wiki o te Reo Māori by performing waiata / songs and scoring in Te Reo Māori where possible. Several members speak the language fluently, and many more are actively involved in learning. The club indicated that it is committed to honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

61.     According to Tatauranga Aotearoa / Stats NZ, 5.5 per cent of Te Hau Kapua / Devonport-Takapuna Local Board residents identified as Māori in the 2018 census, compared to 11.5 per cent in the Tāmaki Makaurau region. The club are committed to increasing Māori participation which is reflected in its Community Outcomes Plan.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

62.     Staff have consulted with the Financial Strategy and Planning Department of the council. No concerns were raised regarding the financial implications for the new lease to Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated.

63.     Ongoing maintenance and capital expenditure of the assets on-site will be covered by the club which is accounted for in current and future budgets.

64.     On 8 June 2023, the council's Governing Body approved the Annual Budget, including amendments to the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012, which increased the rent fee for a ground lease from $1.00 plus GST per annum if demanded to $1,300.00 plus GST per annum, effective 1 July 2023 (resolution number GB/2023/101).

65.     Given that the club applied for the proposed new lease in October 2021, the recommendation is to grant a lease at the level of rent ($1.00) contemplated in the guidelines at the time of the application and prior to the Annual Budget amendments approved in June 2023.

66.     If the local board decides to retain the rent at $1.00, the local board will not be required to supplement the community lease revenue budget. During the first term, however, the local board will not benefit from the additional revenue of $1,299.00 per annum. Staff have recommended that the rent be reviewed within five years of the commencement date to align the rent level with the revised levels introduced in July 2023.

67.     All costs relating to the preparation of the lease agreement and subsequent documentation are borne by the Parks and Community Facilities department of the council.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

68.     Should the local board resolve not to grant the proposed new community ground lease to Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated, the club’s ability to undertake all current and future activities will be negatively impacted. This will have an adverse impact on the achievement of the desired local board plan outcomes.

69.     The proposed new lease affords the club security of tenure, enabling it to attend to the scheduled maintenance of its facility. In the event, that the new lease is not granted, there is a risk associated with maintenance, building renewals and possible improvements. The council will be liable for the assets regardless of whether budget is allocated to or identified for renewals. The renewal of the assets will also not appear in the annual work programme.

70.     In addition, the club’s ability to pursue grants and funding opportunities will be severely impacted.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

71.     Subject to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board’s approval to grant the proposed new community ground lease to Ngataringa Tennis Club Incorporated, staff will engage with the club to finalise the lease agreement and subsequent documentation in accordance with the decision of the local board

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Site Plan

65

b

Community Outcomes Plan

67

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Tai Stirling - Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 




Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Representation review and local board reorganisation

File No.: CP2024/02462

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from the local board on:

i)          The review of representation arrangements for the 2025 elections

ii)         Local board reorganisation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       There are two projects underway in relation to governance arrangements for the 2025 elections:

i)          a review of representation arrangements for the 2025 elections

ii)         a local board reorganisation plan.

3.       Every council is required to review its current representation arrangements at least every six years. Auckland Council’s previous review was for the 2019 elections. It must review arrangements for the 2025 elections.

4.       A council’s representation arrangements are its electoral arrangements. For the Governing Body a review includes the total number of councillors and whether councillors are elected by ward or at-large. If by ward then the number of wards, their names and the number of members in each ward.

5.       For local boards a review includes, for each local board, the total number of members, whether members are elected at-large or by subdivision, number of subdivisions, their names and number of members in each subdivision. The local board name may also be reviewed. A review of representation arrangements reviews each current board’s representation arrangements. It does not alter the number of local boards. It cannot change local board boundaries other than make very minor adjustments to correct anomalies.

6.       At the same time there is a project investigating a local board reorganisation plan which will provide for fewer local boards. If the Governing Body decides to proceed with the reorganisation plan and it is approved by the Local Government Commission, the local board representation arrangements set out in the plan will take effect at the 2025 elections.

7.       The Governing Body has tasked the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) with developing the council’s initial proposal for the representation review and developing options for the reorganisation plan.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on any matters relating to the review of representation arrangements for the current 21 local boards (except for any matters specific to this local board that are addressed in a separate report)

b)      provide feedback on the proposal to reduce the number of local boards through a reorganisation plan noting that Governing Body has supported the development of a 15 local board model as described in this report.

c)      support a reorganisation plan for local boards proceeding to public consultation.

 

Horopaki

Context

Overview

8.       Every council is required to undertake a review of representation arrangements at least every six years. Auckland Council conducted a review for the 2019 elections and must now conduct a review for the 2025 elections. The Governing Body has referred the development of an initial proposal to the JGWP. The Governing Body resolved in April 2023:

That the Governing Body:

e)      whakaae / agree that the council’s initial proposal for representation arrangements for the 2025 elections is developed by the Joint Governance Working Party as follows:

i)     the Joint Governance Working Party will develop Auckland Council’s initial review of representation arrangements after seeking feedback on issues and options from the Governing Body and local boards, then make recommendations to the Governing Body for the Governing Body to formally resolve its proposal for public notification for submissions.

ii)    the Joint Governance Working Party will conduct the hearing of submissions and report its findings to local boards and the Governing Body before the Governing Body makes the final statutory resolution on any representation changes, which will then be publicly notified for objections and appeals.

(Resolution: GB/2023/68, 27 April 2023)

9.       On the initiative of the mayor, the Governing Body has also referred to the JGWP the development of a reorganisation plan relating to local boards. The Governing Body resolved:

That the Governing Body:

a)      whakaae / agree that any reorganisation of local boards is considered under the provisions of the “unitary authority-led reorganisation application” of the proposed Schedule 3A to the Local Government Act 2002

b)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that these provisions include requirements for the council to consider the views and preferences of affected local boards and to demonstrate community support for a reorganisation plan

c)      tautohu / refer to the Joint Governance Working Party the development of a reorganisation plan, or options for reorganisation plans, for recommendation back to the Governing Body so that the Governing Body may then decide whether to proceed further, including whether to undertake public consultation.

(Resolution: GB/2023/108, 22 June 2023)

10.     The Governing Body further resolved on 14 December 2023

That the Governing Body:

a)      whakaae / agree that the Joint Governance Working Party continue to develop an initial proposal for the Auckland Council review of representation arrangements, based on retaining rural Governing Body wards and noting that this results in 20 ward councillors

b)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that the Joint Governance Working Party intends to report an initial proposal for representation arrangements for the Governing Body and for all current local boards, to the May 2024 meeting of the Governing Body, for public notification for submissions

c)      whakaae / agree that the Joint Governance Working Party continue to develop a draft reorganisation plan for local boards based on option one (15 local boards) vs the status quo as per resolution number JGWPC/2023/28 and report back its findings at the same time as it reports its recommendations for the review of representation arrangements

d)      tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that when the Joint Governance Working Party reports back its findings that the Governing Body will then decide whether to proceed further with formal public consultation on a reorganisation plan, based on the Working Party’s investigation into costs and benefits, or to stay with the status quo in terms of number of local boards

e)      whakaae / agree that as part of developing a reorganisation plan for local boards the Joint Governance Working Party will seek initial local board, Māori and targeted community feedback on preferences either for the status quo or for one or more other options for the number of local boards, as identified by the Joint Governance Working Party and that this will also include early engagement on representation arrangements.

(Resolution GB/2023/237)

11.     The table below outlines the differences between a review of representation arrangements and a local board reorganisation plan.

 

Representation review

Reorganisation plan

Legislation

Local Electoral Act 2001

Local Government Act 2002

Scope

·    Total number of councillors

·    Wards and their boundaries

·    Number of members of local boards

·    Subdivisions and their boundaries

·    Names of local boards

·    Number of local boards

·    Local board boundaries

·    Representation arrangements for each local board

Output

·    A proposal for the 2025 elections which is publicly notified for submissions

·    Appeals on final proposal are determined by Local Government Commission

·    A local board reorganisation plan which is submitted to the Local Government Commission for approval

Frequency

At least once every six years

Ad hoc

 

12.     If the council decides to submit a reorganisation plan, the Local Government Commission will consider the approval of the reorganisation plan parallel with any appeals and objections to the council’s proposal for representation arrangements for the 2025 elections. If it approves the reorganisation plan then the contents of the Order in Council relating to the reorganisation plan will be reflected in the Commission’s final determination for representation arrangements.

Representation review

Legislative requirements

13.     A review of representation arrangements must take into account:

·        effective representation of communities of interest

·        fair representation.

14.     Ward and local board boundaries should align as far as is practicable.

15.     The legislation does not define “communities of interest”. The Local Government Commission has provided guidance suggesting there are three dimensions:

·        Perceptual:

o   a sense of belonging to an area or locality which can be clearly defined

·        Functional:

o   the ability to meet with reasonable economy the community’s requirements for comprehensive physical and human services

·        Political:

o   the ability of the elected body to represent the interests and reconcile the conflicts of all its members.

16.     The “fair representation” requirement applies if an area is comprised of wards (in the case of governing body members) or subdivisions (in the case of a local board). The population per member in the ward, or subdivision, must not vary by more than 10 per cent from the average across the whole of Auckland (for councillors) or across a whole local board area (for local board members).

17.     A council may decide to not comply with this requirement if complying would compromise effective representation of communities of interest by:

·        dividing a community of interest or

·        joining communities with few commonalities of interest.

18.     The Local Electoral Act 2001 requires the council to base its population statistics on the ordinarily resident population as provided by the Government Statistician.

19.     Legislation that was passed in 2023 allows the council to include minor adjustments to a local board’s external boundary for the purpose of aligning with a ward. The number of residents affected by such a change must not be greater than 2,000 residents.

Reorganisation plan

Legislative requirements

20.     Legislation was passed in 2023, amending the Local Government Act 2002 by adding a Schedule 3A that deals with the reorganisation of local boards in a unitary authority area. That schedule provides a process titled “Unitary authority-led reorganisation applications”.

21.     The process involves a unitary authority adopting a reorganisation plan and submitting it to the Local Government Commission which is required to approve it unless the required documentation is not supplied or the council has not considered the views and preferences of local boards or the plan does not have community support.

22.     The council is required to consider a number of matters. It must consider the scale and likelihood of achieving the objectives set out in legislation:

·        enabling democratic decision making by, and on behalf of, communities

·        better enabling the purpose of local government

·        efficiencies and cost savings

·        boards have the necessary resources

·        effective responses to opportunities, needs, and circumstances of the area

·        alignment with communities of interest

·        enhanced effectiveness of decision making

·        enhanced ability of local government to meet the changing needs of communities for governance and services into the future

·        co-governance and co-management arrangements.

23.     The council must also consider:

·        implementation costs

·        consequences of not implementing

·        communities of interest

·        public support

·        views and preferences of affected local boards.

Timeline

24.     A summary of the timeline for making decisions:

·        March 2024 - formal reports to boards

·        April 2024 - Joint Governance Working Party considers its recommendations to the Governing Body

·        May 2024 – Governing Body:

o   resolves initial proposal for representation arrangements for 2025 (including 21 local boards)

o   agrees on draft local board reorganisation plan for consultation

·        June – August 2024 - submissions and hearings

·        September 2024 – Governing Body makes final decisions:

o   final proposal for representation arrangements

o   local board reorganisation plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Representation review

Local boards

25.     Local boards which have subdivisions are as follows. There is significant non-compliance with the 10 per cent rule in the Rodney and Howick local boards:

Local board

Pop

(2023)

Mbrs

Pop per mbr

Diff from quota

% diff

Rodney Local Board Area

Wellsford Subdivision

6,960

1

6,960

-2,036

-22.63

Warkworth Subdivision

23,600

3

7,867

-1,129

-12.55

Kumeū Subdivision

40,900

4

10,225

1,229

13.67

Dairy Flat Subdivision

9,500

1

9,500

504

5.61

Total

80,960

9

8,996

Hibiscus and Bays Local Board Area

Hibiscus Coast Subdivision

64,800

4

16,200

1,563

10.67

East Coast Bays Subdivision

52,300

4

13,075

-1,563

-10.67

Total

117,100

8

14,638

Albert-Eden Local Board Area

Ōwairaka Subdivision

50,200

4

12,550

125

1.01

Maungawhau Subdovision

49,200

4

12,300

-125

-1.01

Total

99,400

8

12,425

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board Area

Maungakiekie Subdivision

32,100

3

10,700

-1,314

-10.94

Tamaki Subdivision

52,000

4

13,000

986

8.20

Total

84,100

7

12,014

Howick Local Board Area

Pakuranga Subdivision

43,100

3

14,367

-3,144

-17.96

Howick Subdivision

44,000

3

14,667

-2,844

-16.24

Botany Subdivision

70,500

3

23,500

5,989

34.20

Total

157,600

9

17,511

Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board Area

Papatoetoe Subdivision

60,700

4

15,175

1,361

9.85

Ōtara Subdivision

36,000

3

12,000

-1,814

-13.13

Total

96,700

7

13,814

Franklin Local Board Area

Waiuku Subdivision

16,350

2

8,175

-1,308

-13.80

Pukekohe Subdivision

41,800

4

10,450

967

10.19

Wairoa Subdivision

27,200

3

9,067

-417

-4.39

Total

85,350

9

9,483

 

26.     Issues which are known to staff are summarised in the table below. Many of these issues are simply enquiries from individual members and do not represent the formal position of a local board:

 

Local board

Issue

Status

Devonport-Takapuna

Looking at a name change

 

Devonport-Takapuna

Saunders reserve is split between Devonport-Takapuna and Upper Harbour LB, requiring two different reserve management plans

Investigated. Problem is due to a large meshblock. Solution is to split the meshblock and do minor boundary change to the local board area.

Franklin

Looking at a name change

 

Franklin

Subdivisions do not comply with 10 per cent rule. Largest variance is Waiuku at ‑13.80 per cent

 

Hibiscus and Bays

Subdivisions do not comply with 10 per cent rule. Variance is 10.67 per cent

 

Howick

Subdivisions do not comply with 10 per cent rule. Largest variance is Botany at 34.20 per cent

Staff attended workshop with Howick Local Board on Thursday 1 February 2024. Preference is to add 2 members to the Botany subdivision and split the subdivision. Board is consulting community.

Howick

May look at name change.

Name “Howick Local Board” clashes with name of one of the subdivisions.

Kaipātiki

Move part of northern boundary to Goldfinch Rise.

Move all Kereru Reserve to Upper Harbour.

Local board reorganisation: move Unsworth Heights from Upper Harbour to Kaipātiki.

Goldfinch Rise and Kereru Reserve changes can be implemented as minor boundary changes.

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

Maungakiekie subdivision does not comply with 10 per cent rule being -10.94 per cent

 

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

Concern about misalignment with ward boundaries

It is possible to address this with the review of wards.

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

Ōtara subdivision does not comply with 10 per cent rule being -13.13 per cent

 

Rodney

Rearrange subdivisions to provide better rural representation

Rodney Northern Action Group (NAG) initially submitted to the Governing Body for the 2022 elections and were advised that the next review would be for the 2025 elections.  NAG convened a workshop with board members 22 November 2023.

Rodney

Subdivisions do not comply with 10 per cent rule. Largest variance is Wellsford at
‑22.63 per cent

Staff attended workshop with board on 28 February 2024.

Upper-Harbour

Create subdivisions

Investigated possible subdivisions for compliance and seems ok. Not yet discussed with local board.

Waitākere Ranges

Ensure representation from the heritage area by creating a subdivision.

Staff have investigated.

 

27.     Some of these issues are reported separately in more detail to the relevant local boards.

Governing Body

28.     Due to legislative change this review is the first time the council can review the number of councillors. An approach is to consider whether the Rodney and Franklin rural areas as communities of interest require their own wards in order to provide effective representation. If this is so, then the ratio of residents to councillor is set at about 85,000 which results in 20 councillors (the current number). Any at-large councillors would need to be in addition.

29.     The Joint Governance Working Party and the Governing Body have confirmed that ward options should be developed based on 20 councillors.

30.     One issue is the misalignment between wards and local board boundaries in the isthmus. For the 2019 review of representation there was significant non-compliance with the 10 per cent rule in the Waitematā and Gulf ward. This was corrected by shrinking the Waitematā and Gulf ward on the eastern side with the effect of Parnell and Newmarket becoming part of the Ōrākei ward. There were flow-on effects to Maungakiekie-Tāmaki and Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa wards.

31.     Current population estimates indicate it will be possible to return these ward boundaries to their pre-2019 positions with only minor non-compliance. This option will be developed further.

32.     If there are minor changes to local board boundaries as part of the representation review then relevant ward boundaries might need adjusting to retain alignment.

Reorganisation plan

Discussion to date

33.     The Governing Body tasked the Joint Governance Working Party with developing options for a local board reorganisation plan. The Governing Body noted that one option would need to be the status quo.

34.     The Joint Governance Working Party investigated:

·       (20, 11 and 6 “local councils”)

·       The mayor’s preferred option of 13 local boards, based on the Royal Commission’s model of 11 local councils but adding the two island local boards

·       A model of 15 local boards where the local boards in all wards containing two local boards are amalgamated

·       Various clustering arrangements that were already in existence.

35.     The JGWP recommended to the Governing Body that the model that is developed further is the 15 local board model, to be compared to the status quo. The Governing Body supported this approach. The Governing Body will decide at its May 2024 meeting whether to proceed further with public consultation on local board reorganisation.  

36.     Early engagement has been held with local boards through workshops, advisory panels, community stakeholders and Māori.

Affected local boards

37.     In a 15 local board model, the boards that are affected:

·        Albany ward: Hibiscus and Bays, Upper Harbour

·        North Shore ward: Kaipatiki, Devonport-Takapuna

·        Waitākere ward: Henderson-Massey, Waitākere Ranges

·        Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa ward: Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa

·        Manukau ward: Mangere-Ōtāhuhu, Ōtara-Papatoetoe

·        Manurewa-Papakura ward: Manurewa, Papakura.

38.     The boards that are not affected are:

·        The 2 island boards: Aotea / Gt Barrier, Waiheke

·        The 2 rural boards: Rodney, Franklin

·        Some isthmus boards: Whau, Waitematā, Ōrākei, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

·        The Howick Local Board (it is already associated with a two-member ward).

39.     The following map shows the boards that are affected (amalgamated) or not affected.


40.     There are sound arguments that rural boards should not amalgamate (they already have very large geographic areas and their communities have different issues to urban communities). The island boards are geographically separate. The Howick Local Board is already one large board in a two-councillor ward. All the remaining boards would experience amalgamation except for some in the isthmus (Whau, Waitematā, Ōrākei and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki).

Population size

41.     One issue is that most current local boards have population sizes that are larger than district councils. Under the 15 local board model an amalgamated local board will have a population size of around 180,000.

42.     To put this into perspective staff note that this is the size of Hamilton City Council, which does not have a separate layer of community boards. City councils larger than Hamilton have community boards. The relationship between a local board with a community of 180,000 people is similar in scale to that of Hamilton with its community. Another similarity is that Hamilton City Council makes local decisions (the Waikato Regional Council makes the regional decisions).

43.     However, Hamilton City Council makes decisions that do not come within the scope of a local board, such as employing a chief executive, making bylaws, striking the rate, appointing council-controlled organisations and making regulatory decisions. Hamilton has more responsibilities than local boards yet makes its decisions without there being a more local level of representation.

44.     The following table shows possible local board sizes.

Local Boards

Map

Pop 2023

Amalgamated?

Mbrs

Current
members

Hibiscus & Bays + Upper Harbour

2

191,700

Amalgamated

12

14

Henderson-Massey + Waitākere Ranges

4

187,000

Amalgamated

12

14

Manurewa + Papakura

12

186,700

Amalgamated

12

14

Ōtara-Papatoetoe + Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

10

185,900

Amalgamated

12

14

Albert-Eden +Puketāpapa

6

160,600

Amalgamated

12

14

Howick

11

157,700

No change

11

9

Kaipātiki + Devonport-Takapuna

3

149,900

Amalgamated

12

14

Waitematā

7

86,700

No change

7

7

Whau

5

86,300

No change

7

7

Ōrākei

8

86,200

No change

7

7

Franklin

13

85,300

No change

9

9

Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

9

84,100

No change

7

7

Rodney

1

81,000

No change

9

9

Waiheke

14

9,420

No change

5

5

Aotea/Great Barrier

15

1,050

No change

5

5

 

 

 

 

139

149

 

Representation

45.     Where two local boards amalgamate it is possible to retain existing representation arrangements through establishing subdivisions in the new board that reflect the contributing boards and their original subdivisions – providing that subdivisions meet the +/-10 per cent rule. This ensures voters in each of the contributing areas would continue to vote for representatives for their area.

46.     However, there would be a decrease in representation in that the maximum size of a local board is set at 12 members in legislation. In each case where two local boards amalgamate within a ward the total members of contributing boards are 14 members. Therefore, on amalgamation, there would be a loss of two members over the whole of the new local board area. The ward name is used in the table below for the name of the amalgamated board.

Current boards

Subdivisions

Mbrs

New boards

Subdivisions

Mbrs

Hibiscus & Bays

East Coast Bays 4

8

Albany

East Coast Bays 4

12

Hibiscus Coast  4

Hibiscus Coast 3

Upper Harbour

 

6

Upper Harbour 5

Henderson-Massey

 

8

Waitākere

Henderson-Massey 8

12

Waitākere Ranges

 

6

Waitākere Ranges 4

Manurewa

 

8

Manurewa-Papakura

Manurewa  7

12

Papakura

 

6

Papakura  5

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

 

7

Manukau

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu  6

12

Ōtara-Papatoetoe

Ōtara      3

7

Ōtara  2

Papatoetoe                 4

Papatoetoe 4

Albert- Eden

Maungawhau                 4

8

Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa

Maungawhau 4

12

Owairaka                 4

Owairaka 4

Puketāpapa

 

6

Puketāpapa 4

Kaipātiki

 

8

North Shore

Kaipātiki 7

12

Devonport -Takapuna

 

6

Devonport–Takapuna 5

 

47.     The subdivisions in the table are based on the existing subdivisions. There is minor non-compliance in the new Waitākere Ranges, Puketāpapa and Ōtara subdivisions which could be corrected by tweaking boundaries.

48.     It is, of course, possible to have any other arrangement of subdivisions provided they provide effective representation of communities of interest and comply with the 10 per cent rule. For example, in any case where subdivisions provide unequal number of members, subdivisions could be drawn to ensure equal numbers.

Objectives

49.     The following table provides very brief comments alongside the summary of the legislative objectives. If the council proceeds with a reorganisation plan the Local Government Commission will require our documentation to comment on the scale and likelihood of achieving these objectives.

Objective

Comment

Enabling democratic decision making by, and on behalf of, communities

This is part of the purpose of local government and includes elements of:

·    Community engagement in decision-making

·    Decision-making by elected representatives on behalf of the community and their accountability back to the community (through the election process).

While there is some evidence that turnout at elections can be better for smaller councils, engagement with communities between elections tends to be issue-based.

People will engage over issues that affect them. Last year’s engagement on the Governing Body’s annual plan attracted over 40,000 submissions whereas there were 5,000 submissions total for all local board plans.

Better enabling the purpose of local government

The other part of the purpose of local government is “to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future”.

Amalgamated boards will be better resourced to promote community well-being.

Efficiencies and cost savings

Cost savings are not the main driver for the proposal. There is a value-for-money analysis being undertaken which will identify efficiencies and cost savings.

Boards have the necessary resources

This is a key consideration in the empowerment part of the project and one of the reasons for seeking fewer local boards.

Effective responses to opportunities, needs, and circumstances of the area

Amalgamated boards will be better resourced to respond to the opportunities, needs and circumstances of their area.

Larger geographical areas mean less likelihood of boundary issues (for example when a facility close to a boundary is funded by one local board and used by residents of the neighbouring local board).

Alignment with communities of interest

Each amalgamated board will align with the community of interest of the corresponding ward.  There will be a one-to-one alignment between all boards and wards (apart from the island boards).

Enhanced effectiveness of decision making

Decision-making will likely be more effective because the organisation is better able to support the decision-making if there are fewer boards. Quality advice is crucial to effective decision-making and prompt and competent implementation after a decision is made is equally important.

Enhanced ability of local government to meet the changing needs of communities for governance and services into the future

Future planning is important in terms of providing for communities’ needs for services into the future and will be enhanced through more resources being made available to boards.

Proposals for changes to governance arrangements, such as amalgamating local boards, must take future growth into account.

Co-governance and co-management arrangements

Staff believe that proposals are unlikely to have any significant effect on existing arrangements with Māori. There is engagement with Māori to obtain their feedback on the proposals to understand their views more fully Engagement with existing co-governance and co-management entities will need to be covered as well.

 

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

50.     There may be a climate impact if there is increased motor vehicle use due to members, staff and the public having to travel more due to larger local board areas. This is offset by fewer meetings for staff to travel to and the regular use of remote attendance. It is expected that travel for constituency work would not increase if subdivisions reflect existing electoral areas.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

51.     Council-controlled organisations are involved with the work of local boards to varying extents. Most affected would be Auckland Transport and Eke Panuku. Comments from the council group are being collated as part of the value-for-money exercise.

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

Local impacts and local board views

52.     The representation review and local board reorganisation affect local boards – for some boards the affect of the local board reorganisation is significant and is discussed in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

53.     Council is engaging with Māori to ascertain how these proposals affect them.

54.     The Governing Body has not decided to include Māori representation in its representation arrangements for 2025. It has resolved:

That the Governing Body:

a)   whakaae / agree that further work is required to determine the appropriate arrangements for Māori representation on Auckland Council, including in discussion with Māori and the Auckland public, and request that this be considered by the Joint Governance Working Party and reported back to the Governing Body by 31 December 2024.

(Resolution GB/2023/195, 26 October 2023)

55.     For the local board reorganisation plan there is a requirement to consider the “effective provision for any co-governance and co-management arrangements that are established by legislation (including Treaty of Waitangi claim settlement legislation) and that are between local authorities and iwi or Māori organisations”.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56.     There will be internal resource requirements and costs associated with the programme stages and public consultation in both the current financial year and 2024/2025. Costs through each stage of decision-making by the Governing Body, include:

·        If Governing Body confirms support for the JGWP to further investigate the matters outlined in the recommendations, the early engagement costs are estimated at $30-35k, in addition to some fixed term staff resource. The Governance and CCO Partnerships Directorate will look to absorb these costs within operational budgets. 

·        If the reorganisation of local boards proceeds through to a final proposal to the Local Government Commission, the bulk of additional fixed term staff resources will be needed through to April 2025. This cost is estimated at $210k. The Governance and CCO Partnerships Directorate will look to resource this through reprioritisation of resources and deferral of other work.

57.     If Governing Body confirm support for regionwide public consultation on both a representation review proposal and a local board reorganisation plan at the May 2024 meeting, the costs associated with consultation are between $165 - $200k. A contribution from the Mayor’s discretionary budget has been requested to support consultation costs, should this proceed. The above costs relate to undertaking further work on the analysis and policy elements to support Governing Body decisions for the representation project. Should a change to the status quo be supported by the Governing Body, the cost of change will be reported to the Governing Body as the analysis progresses.

58.     Existing staff will undertake most of the analysis that is required for the local board reorganisation work. Staff do not anticipate a need to engage external resource in order to undertake the analysis. 

59.     The financial implication of a reorganisation decision, particularly a reduction to fewer local boards, is being evaluated and this information will be made available in due course.

60.     A budget of $66,000 associated with the mandatory review of representation arrangements is unavoidable and has been budgeted for.

61.     There are implications of adopting a reorganisation plan at the same time as conducting a representation review.  Council staff have held discussions with the Local Government Commission staff about how the two projects interact. These discussions are continuing.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

62.     Work on both the review of representation arrangements and local board reorganisation has commenced earlier than necessary in order that final decisions are not made too close to the 2025 elections. This mitigates the risk that if there is slippage, final decisions will still be known by early April 2025 in time for the election.

63.     There is a risk that, if the council proceeds with a local board reorganisation application, that the Local Government Commission will not approve it due to shortcomings in documentation or due to lack of community support. This risk is mitigated by on-going contact between council staff and Local Government Commission staff to ensure the correct process is followed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64.     Local board feedback will be reported to, and considered by, the Joint Governance Working Party as it develops its recommendations to the Governing Body.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Representation project – issues specific to Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

File No.: CP2024/02111

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide feedback on the representation project issues that are specific to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The representation project comprises the review of representation arrangements for the 2025 elections, which the council is required to undertake, and the development of a local board reorganisation plan that reduces the number of local boards.

3.       A report on both these matters is being presented to all local boards and is on the same agenda as this report. This current report deals only with those matters that are specific to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board.

4.       The Local Electoral Act 2001 was amended in 2023 to provide for minor changes to local board boundaries when a representation review is undertaken. This makes it possible, for example, to adjust boundaries to align with ward boundaries or address anomalies along the border. A boundary change cannot result in more than 2,000 people being transferred.

5.       Staff have received requests for a small change to the boundary between the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board and Upper Harbour Local Board that currently splits Saunders Reserve between the two boards. Currently there are two reserve management plans for the reserve because of this split.

6.       Aligning the boundary to avoid splitting the reserve requires adjusting a mesh-block. Staff have been communicating with Statistics NZ to get that process underway pending feedback from the board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      support the proposal to align the local board boundary with the boundary to Saunders Reserve and note that this requires adjustment to a meshblock.

 

Horopaki

Context

7.       The Local Electoral Act 2001 was amended in 2023 to include the ability to make minor local board boundary changes during a representation review:

“19JAA Review of local board area boundaries by unitary authority

(1)     A unitary authority may, when it passes a resolution under section 19H, determine by that resolution not only the matters referred to in that section but also new proposed boundaries of local board areas in the district of the unitary authority.

(2)     In determining new proposed boundaries of local board areas, the unitary authority must ensure that—

(a)     the population affected by the new proposed boundaries will not exceed the population transfer limit prescribed by regulations made under this Act; and

(b)     the boundaries of the local board areas will—

(i)      enable democratic local decision making by, and on behalf of, communities of interest throughout the district; and

(ii)      enable equitable provision to be made for the current and future well-being of all communities of interest within the affected area; and

(c)     the boundaries of local board areas coincide with boundaries of the current statistical meshblock areas determined by Statistics New Zealand and used for parliamentary electoral purposes; and

(d)     so far as is practicable, local board area boundaries coincide with ward boundaries.”

8.       The limits to the affected population as currently described in regulations are 2.5% of the population of the affected local board with the smaller population or 2,000 people, whichever is the lower. The proposal to align the boundary which currently splits the Saunders Reserve does not involve the transfer of people.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

9.       The following map demonstrates the current local board boundary.  The boundary is red. The extent of the reserve is outlined in green. To align the boundary with reserve outline a mesh-block needs to be adjusted. Boundaries must align with mesh-blocks. The current mesh-block is shown in the second map.

 

 

10.     Staff do not see any reason why this should not be done and have made contact with Statistics NZ to commence the process pending feedback from the board.

11.     In terms of the requirements of section 19JAA quoted above, aligning the boundary so that all of Saunders Reserve is in the one local board area will enhance democratic decision-making. Having it split between two boards confuses democratic decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

12.     The issues in this report do not impact on climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

13.     There is no significant impact on the council group. There may be a small beneficial impact by simplifying the management of Saunders Reserves if it relates to only one local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

14.     This report provides an opportunity for the board to feedback its views to the Joint Governance Working Party and Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

15.     This boundary adjustment does not impact Māori differently to other parts of the community.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

16.     There will be costs associated with LINZ producing official maps of boundary changes. For the 2019 review this was around $12,000 total for all changes. These costs will be met from the representation review project.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

17.     A minor change to boundaries is implemented as part of a representation review. This process includes the risk of appeals that are decided by the Local Government Commission on receiving submissions.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

18.     The board’s feedback will be reported to the Joint Governance Working Party then the Governing Body

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Warwick McNaughton - Principal Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Proposals for More Empowered Local Boards

File No.: CP2024/02487

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek local board feedback on initial staff proposals for more empowered local boards.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       Staff have workshopped the proposal for fewer, more empowered local boards and representation arrangements with all local boards during February 2024 and are now bringing these proposals to March 2024 local board business meetings seeking formal feedback.

3.       At the workshops, staff advised that the proposals for fewer more empowered local boards represented initial staff thinking and that they were seeking initial responses from boards.

4.       This report focuses on the more empowered local boards proposal. It uses work done to date and what staff have been seeing and hearing both from elected members and the organisation to identify how the existing local board model might be improved to give effect to the Mayor’s request.

5.       The report outlines matters under two key shifts which if implemented would support local boards to be more empowered. These shifts are that local boards need to have:

a)      sufficient strategic advice to fulfil their purpose on behalf of their specific communities

b)      sufficient resourcing and greater decision-making/accountability over their funding arrangements.

6.       Several ideas are put forward about what the council group might need to do differently to support this shift, such as:

·        examining the complexity of current approaches and identifying where things could be simpler

·        working towards an organisation that is responsive and flexible

·        developing bespoke systems and processes that reflect the needs and differences of different local boards and only retain consistency where necessary

·        lifting the level of local board activity to a governance level aligned with what more empowered local boards should do and reducing the time and resource taken up on low impact and operational matters

·        reviewing plans and policies which impact on the operation of local boards to ensure the approach best fits what is needed for more empowered local boards.

7.       While staff are undertaking early engagement on proposals for fewer and more empowered local boards together and to meet the Mayor’s wish for change to be in place by 2025 local election, the more empowered aspect is not subject to electoral timelines and can, if necessary take longer.

8.       Staff will report initial feedback from February 2024 local board workshops to the March 2024 meeting of the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) and the six local board representatives on the JGWP will share the working party’s consideration of that with the local board clusters they represent.

9.       Local board March 2024 business meeting feedback will be reported to the April 2024 working party meeting, ahead of consideration by the Governing Body in May 2024. If the Governing Body agrees to proceed, the proposals will go to formal public consultation in June 2024.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      provide feedback on staff proposals for more empowered local boards, in particular:

i)        aspects of the proposal that it supports, opposes, has further comment on or would like further information on

ii)       ideas and examples of what more empowered local boards should be able to do

iii)      the benefits, or otherwise of linking proposals for more empowered local boards with having fewer local boards.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

What does ‘more empowered’ mean?

10.     The Mayor’s proposal for more empowered local boards is part of his wider proposal that there be fewer local boards and that they be more fairly funded. The Mayor’s expectation is that local boards have the true level of local leadership and accountability over local matters envisaged for them under the legislation, and if necessary, where current legislation has not met this intent, that legislative change be pursued.

11.     Many of the recommendations of the 2016 Governance Framework Review (GFR) are in effect proposals for local boards to be more empowered. In particular, the Governing Body’s October 2021 decision to approve Increased Local Board Decision-making is a significant example of this.

12.     While there have been notable wins and improvements in such areas as the organisation establishing more teams which directly work with and face local boards, more remains to be done and this has been evidenced by local board member responses to elected members surveys and the 2023 Mayoral Office survey of local board members. In both cases these show significant dissatisfaction from local board members on their role and decision-making, funding, the advice they seek and receive, and their ability to advance the matters that they value.

13.     So how might fewer more empowered local boards help to turn that around?  At a holistic level local board roles and responsibilities, allocations and delegations, financial policy and process matters should be tested against the following: that local boards should be:

a)      supported to fully give effect to the provisions included in and envisaged by the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA) and enabled by Auckland Council to do so

b)      empowered according to the principle of subsidiarity enshrined in LGACA - that non-regulatory decisions should be made by local boards except where decisions are better made on an Auckland-wide basis.

14.     Based on previous work and feedback, the following are the key themes and matters that have been identified. It isn’t considered to be exhaustive or definitive list. Rather it is a catalyst to stimulate local board members and staff, to think about and articulate what they think local boards should be able to do. The two key themes are as follows:

 

Sufficient strategic advice

15.     Local boards should receive sufficient strategic advice to fulfil their purpose on behalf of their communities. Local boards need to be supported and provided with advice to fully exercise all the legislative powers they have been given (and as appropriate legislative change), including:

a)      being genuinely able to govern in ways that reflect their communities’ differences and diversity and not have to all do things in the same way for administrative convenience

b)      have access to strategic advice to support the development of local solutions provided these are consistent with regional policies and plans

c)      have a level of influence over the decisions and activities of the Governing Body and Auckland Council group commensurate with local board’s legislated governance role

d)      be supported and enabled to interact with the communities they represent with the aim of increasing the effectiveness of their engagement and trust in their activities

e)      be supported by systems and processes that are fit for purpose, simple to understand, flexible and agile, and of practical value.

Funding arrangements - resourcing, decision-making and accountability

16.     Local boards should receive sufficient resourcing and have greater decision-making and accountability over their funding arrangements, including:

a)      Auckland Council should develop minimum standards for all or most local community services in discussion with local boards, and commit to funding these

b)      Local boards should be able to:

i)       raise funds to advance some or all their local community services beyond agreed and funded minimum service levels

ii)       decide what additional activities and services they want, provided that they can fund and justify them, and that required support structures are in place

iii)      engage with Auckland Transport to seek delegated decision-making over local transport activities such as town centre improvements and street trading activities, where this doesn’t adversely impact on the transport network.

17.     The following are some examples staff have heard about which support the above proposals:

a)      more easily obtain approval to use targeted rates without the major time consuming and resource heavy process that is currently required and to be able to use a targeted rate more widely e.g. for all or any local community services

b)      change a local asset or the way it is used. Currently it is difficult to get advice for something that isn’t already on a work programme or being progressed under a regional provision

c)      have greater opportunities for local procurement. Current most procurement is managed and decided centrally and local boards see opportunities for use of local providers without adversely impacting the agreed value of bigger contracts.

d)      be able to more easily review community leases to free up space currently tied up in peppercorn leases with low-value, low-participation activities on valuable council land

e)      be able to have decision-making over local planning and policy development for local community services for such things as open space and town centres

f)       have clear, consistent advice on what the proceeds from sale of service property can be used for and enabling local boards to dispose of a property prior to identifying project(s) to which the proceeds of sale will be allocated

g)      shifting local assets between community and commercial use (or a hybridisation of the two)

h)      enable open space acquisition and development in high-growth areas (including through demolition of under-utilised assets to free up open space)

i)        better understand and have clear roles and responsibilities on local vs regional strategic asset network decision-making.

18.     As discussed at workshops, staff are encouraging local boards to identify things they would like to do, but haven’t had advice on, or where they have been advised that matters can’t proceed. In addition to formal resolutions, staff have also asked that members bring matters they have been thinking about to staff working on these proposals. Examples will help staff understand what roadblocks there are to advancing these matters.

What might the council group need to do differently to support this change?

19.     Having noted that significant resource is applied to operating 21 local boards and that over the last 13 years the organisation has continually sought to improve how it supports local boards, there does however remain some disconnect between what local board members want to do and what the organisation currently supports. There may be times when things that local boards want to do will not fall within their role and responsibilities, but this does need to be tested and justified.

20.     An approach going forward might include to:

a)      examine the complexity of current approaches and identify where matters can be simplified and what duplication can be removed

b)      alter systems and processes to reflect the needs and differences of different local boards and only retain consistency where the need for efficiency overrides these individual needs. 

c)      overtime lift the level of local board activity to a governance level commensurate with what more empowered local boards will do and reduce the time and resource taken up on low impact matters

d)      review where advice comes from to local boards in the organisation and ensure it is led organisation-wide and that the level of strategic and policy advice available to local boards is commensurate with their more empowered role

e)      review plans and policies which impact on the operation of local boards to ensure the approach best fits what is needed for more empowered local boards.

21.     Considerable resources, time and thinking will be required to implement agreed changes successfully. Experience with issues around delivering increased decision-making for local boards suggests this should be approached systematically and in stages. Phasing change, prioritising what is doable, what will have the most impact for the least effort, and where resources can be applied relatively easily to change is suggested.

Other implications

22.     Staff have also noted that local boards need to be remunerated and have work hours commensurate with their intended role – understanding that this is a decision of the Remuneration Authority.  A review of its approach to setting the remuneration of Auckland’s local board members was undertaken by the Authority in 2019 and uses a size index based on local board:

·        population

·        gross operating expenditure (taken from local board agreements)

·        total assets (council assets attributed to local boards)

·        the Socioeconomic Deprivation Index.

23.     The Authority’s size index is based on the roles and responsibilities of the board rather than the number of members or the population of the local board area.  Staff are working with the Authority to understand how any proposed changes might impact on local board member remuneration.  It is likely a review of Auckland Council’s elected member remuneration will be reviewed on a holistic basis by the Authority.

How this fits with other workstreams?

24.     Local boards are also being asked for their views on proposals for fewer local boards; status quo or a 15 local board model. An analysis is also being undertaken on the costs and benefits of fewer local boards and this will be reported to the April 2024 JGWP meeting.  The ‘fairer funding’ model is currently out for consultation as part of the Long-term Plan and feedback and next steps will also be brought back to the JGWP, including how funding would be allocated if there were 15 local boards.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

25.     This report itself has no climate impacts. It is possible that more empowered local boards will making more influential decisions will have different impacts on the climate.  Climate impacts will be reported both when a report is brought to Governing Body when a final decision on more empowered local boards is made and when each board makes a decision that impacts climate.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

26.     Fewer, and/or more empowered and/or more fairly-funded local boards will have a significant impact on the council group, and particularly those parts of the organisation that interact with local boards.  These impacts will be considered and addressed if proposals proceed to public consultation.

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

Local impacts and local board views

27.     These proposals have the potential to have a significant local impact, not just on local boards but on their communities. This includes a possible change in community awareness of, and engagement with their representatives as communities become aware of what more empowered local boards might do.

28.     Comprehensive engagement with local boards on these changes and the provision of high-quality advice is critical for success throughout this entire process. Early engagement in February 2024 and reporting to local board business meetings in March 2024 are part of this.  Regionwide consultation and further engagement with local boards will be triggered if the Governing Body decides that the proposal has merit and should be investigated further.

29.     All matters will primarily be progressed through the JGWP which has six local board members, each representing a “cluster” of local boards. These representatives are responsible for bringing the views of these clusters to JGWP meetings and engaging with their members on the direction and next steps agreed by the working party.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

30.     Engagement with Māori is a core part of advancing these proposals for fewer more empowered local boards. The early engagement process includes Mana whenua and Mataawaka.  The outcomes of this engagement will be reported back to the April 2024 JGWP meeting.

31.     Many of local board members who responded to the recent Mayor’s survey outlined in this report suggested that having Māori representation on local boards, along with fewer boards might improve the way they engage with Māori. The Independent Māori Statutory Board chair is also on the JGWP and has contributed to these discussions to date.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

 

32.     While this report itself has no direct financial implications, there are potentially very significant financial implications resulting from the establishment of fewer, more fairly-funded and more empowered local boards.

33.     These will be progressively identified as the above parts of this wider change develop. Stage one of the value for money work will outline the costs and benefits of having fewer local boards and will progress this further as options for more empowered local boards progress. The associated organisational change workstream will contribute further to this.

34.     The JGWP work is supported by a general manager level steering group which meets ahead of each JGWP meeting. This includes finance staff and is a key control and oversight group for financial implications.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35.     There are a number of risks and mitigations associated with this workstream, as follows:

a)      Political risks. Local board representatives on the JGWP have expressed scepticism about these proposed changes, questioned the need for them and asked why there can’t be 21 more empowered local boards, not fewer. Local board feedback on these proposals from February workshops and March 2024 business meetings will be considered alongside other early engagement feedback.

b)      Implementation risks. It is inevitable that the disruption of change will be felt for some time and this could have negative impacts on local community service delivery, council’s and local boards’ reputation and level of trust, and increase disaffection by local board members. To mitigate this risk, the change process will need to be robust and adequately resourced.

c)      Delivery risks. The ability of the organisation to pivot to support these changes and to provide the enhanced advice needed for change to be effective, may not be achieved in a timely manner.  To mitigate this risk, the Executive Leadership Team oversight will be needed.  This will be required of CCO executives as well, which is why it is important to capture their views at an early stage.

36.     Broader programme risks have been identified and are being monitored.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37.     The JGWP has monthly meetings planned for 2024. Staff will report initial informal local board workshops themes to the March JGWP meeting alongside those of stakeholder views that have been gathered. March local board business meeting feedback will be reported to the April JGWP. The JGWP and the Governing Body will decide on public consultation in June/July 2024.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

John Nash - Programme Manager

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Local board feedback on freshwater management in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland

File No.: CP2024/02367

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek feedback from local boards on the implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       This report provides an overview of the feedback received through the second phase of public consultation to inform how freshwater should be managed in Auckland.

3.       This work is part of the programme to implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM), which provides national direction for freshwater management to all councils in New Zealand, and applies to rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands, aquifers (groundwater), and springs.

4.       Consultation questions relate to a wide range of matters, not limited to the proposed long-term vision for freshwater in Auckland, freshwater values and outcomes, how to look after ‘outstanding’ waterbodies, how to protect and improve habitats, and how to manage the increasing demand for water. There were 3,899 submissions. Responses by local board area are included in relevant tables throughout the summary of feedback.

5.       When the consultation was held (from 3 November to 4 December 2023), the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) statutory deadline for council to notify a freshwater plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) was 31 December 2024. The government has since signalled an intent to amend the NPS-FM and has moved the plan change deadline to December 2027. A revised NPS-FM is anticipated by the end of 2025.

6.       While there may be a longer-term impact on the council’s implementation programme, at this stage consultation feedback remains relevant and will inform any future work.

7.       Local boards have been provided with the consultation questions (Attachment A), a summary of feedback (Attachment B) and a local board members’ briefing that was held on Monday 19 February 2024 (a recording of which can be found on Nexus). Additionally, the HaveYourSay website contains the consultation document, an online mapping tool, and a “state and trend” dashboard for the health of Auckland’s waterbodies.

8.       There is a separate and ongoing programme of engagement with mana whenua.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      kohuki / consider feedback received from their communities in the second phase of public consultation to inform implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland.

b)      whakarite / provide feedback as per the consultation questions.

 

Horopaki

Context

Why consult

9.       The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 (NPS-FM) directs the council to develop a plan to maintain or improve the state of freshwater in Auckland. In developing that plan, the council is required to actively involve tangata whenua (to the extent they wish to be involved) and to engage with communities.

About the NPS-FM

10.     National policy statements are issued under the Resource Management Act (RMA). They allow central government to state objectives and policies for matters of national significance, which support the sustainable management purposes of the Act.

11.     Regional councils and unitary authorities are required to change regional policy statements and regional plans to give effect to the requirements of the NPS-FM. This applies to all freshwater bodies, including rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands, aquifers (groundwater), and springs.

12.     At the time of consultation, the NPS-FM required that all freshwater outcomes must be driven by ‘Te Mana o te Wai.’ This describes the vital importance of water and establishes a priority order to support decision making, called the hierarchy of obligations:

·        First, the health and wellbeing of waterbodies and freshwater ecosystems

·        Second, the health needs of people (such as drinking water)

·        Third, the ability of people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being, now and in the future.

13.     Auckland Council is required to set ‘ambitious but reasonable’ goals to improve the health of freshwater within a generation. Any further loss or degradation of wetlands and streams is to be avoided; restoration is to be encouraged. National bottom lines for freshwater health must be met, and a ‘baseline state’ for freshwater improvements has to be set, from 2017 if possible.

14.     While primarily concerned with the management of freshwater, the NPS-FM also requires an integrated management approach called ‘ki uta ki tai’, including consideration of the relationship of freshwater and freshwater management to the coastal receiving environment as well as the foreseeable impacts of climate change.

15.     The National Objectives Framework’ (NOF) contains a series of related requirements for the plan change process, such as setting a long-term vision, and identifying values. Each stage sets the foundation for the next. See Figure 1 below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

16.     The council needs to set objectives and specific, measurable targets to maintain and / or improve water quality and ecosystem health. Once a vision, values, and environmental outcomes for Auckland are decided, a baseline state, or benchmark in time, can be established for the attributes of Auckland’s freshwater systems. From there, appropriate targets can be set. Compulsory ‘attributes’ (essentially something that can be measured and monitored) relate to water quality, ecosystem health and human contact.

Impact of signalled changes to the NPS-FM

17.     When the consultation was held, the council needed to amend the AUP by 31 December 2024 and develop non-regulatory action plans to support improvement of regional freshwater resources, as soon as possible.

18.     In December, the government signalled its intent to amend the NPS-FM and moved the RMA deadline for the plan change to December 2027, to allow councils time to implement the amended NPS-FM.

19.     The government has indicated that the process to complete a revised NPS-FM will take between 18 to 24 months and will include a robust and full consultation process with all stakeholders, including iwi and the public.

20.     While there may be a longer-term impact, the consultation results remain largely relevant and will inform any future work. Staff are currently assessing the potential impact of the changes on council’s planning and implementation approach, in order to report to the programme steering committee, the NPS-FM political working group, and the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee.

21.     Since the consultation, the Court of Appeal has also quashed the NPS-FM exemptions for what were the Pukekohe and Horowhenua Specified Vegetable Growing Areas, due to inadequate consultation by Ministry for the Environment staff when the exemptions were inserted in the NPS-FM. The exemptions allowed for regional councils to set targets below national bottom lines in areas where vegetable production could be compromised. It is likely that the government will address this matter when developing revisions to the NPS-FM.

22.     High levels of contaminants in the Pukekohe area continue to be a concern and will need to be addressed in the NPS-FM programme.

How freshwater farm plans fit in

23.     Changes to the NPS-FM do not affect Freshwater Farm Plans, the scope of which is outside this consultation. Freshwater Farm Plans are a practical way for farmers and growers to demonstrate how they are managing the impact of their operations on the freshwater environment. They will be gradually phased in across Auckland from late 2024 and will be a key method for implementing the NPS-FM in rural areas, along with rules in the AUP, and non-regulatory action plans.

24.     Many farmers already have a farm environment plan or are part of an industry programme. Freshwater Farm Plans will build on that work.

How we consulted

25.     This is the second of two planned public consultations to inform implementation of the NPS-FM in Auckland. In the first, (June / July 2023) the council sought feedback to develop a vision and values for freshwater in Auckland.

26.     This time (3 November 2023 to 4 December 2023), the council checked back in with the community to get their views of proposed measures to protect, use, and allocate freshwater. There were 3,899 submissions.

27.     Respondents could comment on one or more of the consultation questions. Feedback was sought on a wide range of matters, not limited to; the proposed long-term vision for freshwater in Auckland, freshwater values and outcomes, how to look after ‘outstanding’ waterbodies, how to protect and improve habitats, and how to manage the increasing demand for water.

28.     Detailed background information was available for those who wanted it in:

·        ‘Setting our Direction’ – the consultation document

·        A geographic information system (GIS) online mapping tool

·        A state and trend dashboard about the health of Auckland’s waterbodies.

29.     The feedback form was translated into Te Reo, Hindi, Korean, Samoan, Chinese (simplified and traditional) and Tongan. Some information was available in New Zealand Sign Language on AKHaveyoursay/freshwaterakl

30.     Supporting communications began appearing in the week before the start date and ran throughout, utilising a variety of communication platforms – Our Auckland, mailing lists, radio advertising, local board Facebook pages, notifications on Linked In, etc. Feedback was submitted online through AKHaveyoursay/freshwaterakl, or collected by email, post, Auckland libraries, community partners, and the People’s Panel.

31.     Several events and activities were undertaken to encourage the public to have their say. These included:

·        Face to face interactions / ‘community drop ins’ at Auckland Diwali Festival (Saturday 4th / Sunday 5th November), Clevedon A&P Show (Saturday 4th / Sunday 5th November), Auckland Regional Waka Ama Regatta (Saturday 18 November) and Grey Lynn Park Festival (Saturday 18 November).

·        An online information webinar presented by subject matter experts (Wednesday 15th November), available on AKHaveyoursay/freshwaterakl.

·        A community partner-led engagement programme reaching out to Auckland’s Indian, Samoan, Asian and Pasifika communities.

Local board feedback

32.     To conclude the consultation, local board feedback will be incorporated into the summary of feedback for consideration by the programme steering committee, the NPS-FM political working group and the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee. The results of the consultation will also be reported back to mana whenua.

Other engagement

33.     The NPS-FM programme includes two separate and complementary streams of planned engagement:

34.     ‘In partnership’ with 19 mana whenua groups across Auckland, a series of hui have been held with mana whenua since 2021. Maintaining the current state of freshwater where it can be further improved is insufficient for mana whenua; degradation needs to be halted, and mauri enhanced.

35.     ‘Involving’ stakeholders with a high level of interest across industrial, farming, environmental, and commercial sectors, to ensure that their concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered. Workshops with stakeholders began in 2023. Further input will be sought as the plan change is developed.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

How freshwater health is monitored

36.     The AUP has a comprehensive range of provisions that aim to protect Auckland’s water resources, including objectives, policies, rules and other methods. In 2022 staff assessed the effectiveness of AUP provisions in meeting its stated freshwater objectives and concluded that while these address all the relevant matters, waterways are still degrading. This means improvements are needed[5].

37.     Regular freshwater monitoring is conducted as part of the State of the Environment monitoring programme. This includes monitoring rainfall, river flows, groundwater levels, water quality in rivers and streams, lakes and groundwater, and aquatic life and habitats in rivers, lakes and wetlands.

38.     Staff are working to improve monitoring coverage of waterbodies over time and have recently increased the regional lakes monitoring programme from five to 15 lakes. The river and stream monitoring network has also been expanded. The monitoring work will provide information to understand the current state (at any point in time) and long-term trends – both positive and negative – in freshwater bodies and in the ecosystems they support.

39.     The NPS-FM utilises this monitoring for grading state via bands, with A being very good and D (or E) being poor. The best monitoring information available is used, and several modelling tools are used to extrapolate results for the region. These tools help council and communities to better understand the extent of issues facing the region’s freshwater bodies.

40.     Water quality and ecosystem health is generally good at the top of river catchments, where the land cover is mainly native forest. As rivers and streams flow down from the hills, the surrounding land use changes, with less vegetation and more rural and urban activity. Water quality and ecosystem health is much poorer in these areas.

41.     Figure 2 is an overview of the causes of degradation in Auckland’s waterways. All of these pressures have impacts on what Aucklanders individually and collectively value about fresh water, such as being able to use waterways for swimming and recreation, harvesting mahinga kai, and protecting threatened species.

 

 

Known state of freshwater in Auckland

42.     Council is required to set a ‘baseline state’ for freshwater improvements. This is a starting point from which to measure river and lake health and assess improvements over time.

43.     Baselines are being measured for a range of water quality and ecosystem health attributes (the characteristics we measure). The baseline is usually set in 2017 to protect against any degradation since that time.

44.     Further information about the range of attributes to be measured is available in the consultation document.

Potential management approaches

45.     Council is aiming for one set of rules for Auckland, with integrated and consistent planning provisions. Bespoke and/or targeted management responses, processes, and provisions will be used where needed, to protect special sites and features.

46.     To achieve freshwater targets, council needs to improve how the activities that impact water in both Auckland’s rural and urban areas are managed. This will require a combination of both regulatory tools (rules in the AUP), and non-regulatory tools such as council strategies, action plans, asset management, monitoring, support for community work, incentives, and training.

47.     Management tools may include regulatory limits on resource use (land use controls, input controls and output controls in the AUP), as well as non-regulatory action plans and other voluntary measures (i.e. investment programmes, and actions by council). There may be some changes to the limits set on certain activities, and how progress is monitored.

48.     Several methods could be utilised, including:

a)      Stock exclusion / keeping stock away from waterways, wetlands, and off highly erodible land. This is one of the most effective tools for improving water quality and habitats. AUP rules and national regulations already in place for keeping stock out of waterways, do not cover many small streams in steeper areas, which contribute a lot of sediment and E. coli.

b)      Discharges to freshwater include stormwater runoff and dairy farm effluent. Council can put greater controls on discharges, to avoid them altogether or to ensure any discharges get the best treatment possible before they reach waterways.

c)      Riparian vegetation (the plants and trees along the water margins and banks) is essential for healthy water. It provides the cool, shady habitats freshwater ecosystems need. The existing rules may not be providing enough space for riparian vegetation to establish and thrive around waterways.

d)      On-site wastewater provisions in the AUP may need to be strengthened to be consistent with the performance standards in the council’s updated guidance document for on-site wastewater and address some of the consenting barriers to upgrading onsite systems.

e)      The existing approach to sediment-generating activities may also need to be changed, to prefer those that minimise land disturbance and have a greater soil conservation focus.

·                         Proposed vison

49.     Council is required to have a vision for freshwater management in Auckland. The vision will become an objective in the AUP. This means that it will need to be applied in the policies and rules of the AUP, and to resource consent decisions.

50.     The overarching vision has been developed with mana whenua. It is ‘To protect and enhance Te Mauri o te Wai – the life-sustaining capacity of water.’ This aligns with the Auckland Water Strategy and responds to the feedback already received from mana whenua and the community about freshwater values.

 

51.     After community consultation in 2022, three Freshwater Management Units (FMU) were identified. They are the Kaipara FMU, the Manukau FMU and the Hauraki FMU (i.e. the combined catchment areas that drain to each harbour). Based on the characteristics, state and environmental pressures on freshwater in each FMU, council is also proposing specific local vision statements.

Proposed values

52.     The NPS-FM lists several values that apply everywhere and other values that council must consider for each FMU. Two additional values have been proposed, with reference to the first consultation on how to manage freshwater in Auckland. These are:

·     the importance of resilience for our freshwater and freshwater bodies, and

·     the value that Aucklanders place on amenity - that is, enjoying being near rivers, lakes and waterfalls without necessarily going into the water.

Proposed environmental outcomes

53.     For each freshwater values that will apply in Auckland, there are specified environmental outcome/s. The outcomes describe what we want to achieve for each of the values. There are particular outcomes for the Pukekohe Specified Vegetable Growing Area, the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area and the Hunua Ranges.

Criteria for ‘outstanding waterbodies’

54.     Outstanding waterbodies are the rivers, lakes and wetlands that are the ‘best of the best’ in the region. Staff are developing relevant criteria for these and for assessing available information relating to Māori cultural values and ecological, landscape and recreational values. The consultation document includes a list of proposed outstanding waterbodies.

Identifying primary contact sites

55.     Primary contact sites are freshwater sites that are known to be regularly used for recreational activities where people make contact with water, like swimming, waka ama and kayaking.

56.     Sites will be identified in partnership with Auckland’s Safeswim programme. Although Safeswim has historically focused on Auckland’s beaches, it now includes nine freshwater sites. There are 14 other potential freshwater sites that might be included, subject to further analysis and evaluation. Particular attention will be paid to human health risks at these sites. Stricter standards may be needed to reduce sources of contamination in these catchments, such as keeping stock out of waterways and upgrading wastewater systems.

Setting targets for improvement

57.     The targets which need to be set to improve freshwater [attributes] need to be set above national bottom lines. This is ambitious for some attributes, such as E. coli in freshwater.

58.     At this stage the approach will be to set long-term targets to improve all attribute states across the region where they are poor (C or D band). Where waterbody health is already good (A or B band), the approach will be to at least maintain the baseline state.

59.     Staff are working with vegetable growers to ensure that they are using best management practices as they produce vegetables. Other actions could include requirements to limit expansion of the area and have a cap on fertiliser application.

Fish passage action plan

60.     A fish passage action plan is being prepared to ensure that in-stream structures enable the passage of fish.

61.     Many native fish species need to migrate between fresh and salt water to complete their life cycle. Culverts and other barriers in streams can impede fish passage. New culverts need to meet fish passage standards.

 

62.     There are more than 4,000 existing barriers to fish passage in the Auckland region. Most of these are on private land. Staff are drafting an action plan to remediate these barriers, but realistically it will take time to replace these barriers with fish-friendly designs.

63.     Considerations include how to prioritise remediating existing barriers, catchments based on factors such as mana whenua engagement and initiatives, how to maintain existing high-quality habitat catchments, and how to support threatened species management. This will factor in a cost-benefit analysis, the presence of community groups who can contribute, and connectivity to the coast.

Avoiding the loss of wetlands, rivers and streams

64.     Only around four per cent of Auckland’s freshwater wetland ecosystems remain. Urban and rural streams and wetlands are at risk from reclamation, drainage, vegetation clearance and piping. The NPS-FM directs that council needs to avoid the loss of wetland areas, rivers and streams, and their values.

65.     In some cases, the council proposes to retain stricter rules in the AUP than those required under national regulations. For example, council could keep the 20-metre (AUP) setback for vegetation removal around wetlands instead of the 10-metre national standard. For rivers and streams, staff are looking at keeping the current non-complying activity status for river reclamation, which is more restrictive than the discretionary activity status set in the national regulations.

Water quantity and phasing out over allocation

66.     Existing water take allocations may also need to be reviewed. There are some over-allocations of water already occurring in the region’s aquifers. Revised flows, levels and take limits will need to ensure that water is available to reliably meet reasonable irrigation, pastoral farming, food processing, commercial and industrial needs.

67.     Under the NPS-FM, freshwater flows and levels in rivers and lakes must be high enough to support the health of aquatic life and ecosystems, even in times of drought. Currently, the AUP prioritises domestic needs, municipal water supply, and animal drinking water above other water uses. It could be more specific, for example making location-specific priorities for agriculture or horticulture where there is highly productive land.

68.     Demand for water is high in some parts of the Auckland region, and this demand is only likely to increase as the population grows and the climate changes. Managing the taking and use of water is especially important when water levels are low, as in times of drought, and in areas where the amount of water that can be taken out of waterbodies has been overallocated. Best available information suggests around 10 per cent of the region’s aquifers are over allocated. This may increase as flows, levels and take limits are revised.

69.     Work is underway to develop an approach for phasing out over-allocation, and to determine the time in which it will take place. When the plan change is notified, it will include further information about how and when this will take place.

Common themes of consultation feedback

70.     See Attachment B for a comprehensive feedback summary. The feedback form for this consultation asked people 22 questions, spread across six sections:

A.      Long-term vision

B.      Values and environmental outcomes

C.      Waterbodies where special management is required

D.      Achieving the vision and environmental outcomes for freshwater

E.      Habitat protection and improvement

F.      Water quantity

G.      Other feedback.

 

71.     There were 3,873 from individuals and 36 from organisations.

72.     In general, there was widespread support for all proposals, with the majority receiving at least 70 per cent support.

73.     The one exception was the approach to identify outstanding waterbodies, with criteria for Māori cultural values, ecological, landscape and recreational values. This proposal received 50 per cent support, while 38 per cent did not support it. Common themes in the responses included:

·     of those that supported the proposal, and provided comments, most commonly said they thought mana whenua should be involved as we should acknowledge Māori cultural values or agreed with the approach to address water quality issues

·     of those that did not support the proposal most commonly felt the plan focuses too heavily on Māori values, and/or were opposed to co-governance arrangements with Māori entities in general. A significant number of submissions received that expressed these views coincided with an external campaign by ‘Hobson’s Pledge’ These are reported on within the ‘individual’ submissions category.

74.     Common themes in the responses to each question are covered in the body of the report. However, below are some general themes found across all questions.

75.     Those that were supportive of the proposals most commonly addressed:

·     concerns for the health, quality, and sustainability of water resources

·     the importance of sustainable practices, climate change mitigation, and protecting our waterways for future generations

·     a desire to have improved plans and management of waterways

·     the importance of prioritising healthy waterways to support water consumption for people.

76.     Those that were not supportive of the proposals most commonly addressed:

·        concerns that the plan focuses too heavily on Māori values, and/or were opposed to co-governance arrangements with Māori entities in general

·        that certain aspects of the plan were unnecessary and/or a waste of time and/or money.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

77.     The fundamental concept of the NPS-FM Te Mana o te Wai is about restoring and preserving the balance between the water, the wider environment, and the community. This concept is in line with the natural environment priority of Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan, which sets the goal:

Oranga taiao, oranga tāngata: a healthy and connected natural environment supports healthy and connected Aucklanders. The mauri (life essence) of Tāmaki Makaurau is restored”.

78.     The NPS-FM includes the following policy direction in response to climate change:

Policy 4: Freshwater is managed as part of New Zealand’s integrated response to climate change.

79.     The NPS-FM also requires councils to have regard to the foreseeable impact of climate change when setting limits on resource use, when setting environmental flows and levels, and when assessing and reporting on the effectiveness and efficiency of plan provisions under section 35(2A) of the RMA.

80.     The implementation of the NPS-FM will help to promote the resilience of freshwater ecosystems to the impacts of climate change. The development of freshwater action plans will require sustainable land and water management practices to enhance the mauri and health of waterways, which is in line with actions prioritised in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

81.     Subject matter experts from across the council prepared and peer reviewed consultation questions and supporting material, which was approved by the NPS-FM political working group.

82.     A memo to members dated 14 August 2023 set out the process for local board input. Members had the opportunity to attend briefings on the consultation content on 30 October 2023, and on the consultation feedback on 19 February 2024.

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

Local impacts and local board views

83.     Feedback received from local boards will be incorporated into the summary of feedback for consideration by the programme steering committee, the political working group and the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

84.     The NPS-FM currently states that the council must “actively involve tangata whenua (to the extent they wish to be involved) in freshwater management” including in identifying Māori values and decision-making processes relating to Māori freshwater values.

85.     Partnership with 19 mana whenua entities in Auckland is being undertaken through an on-going, jointly agreed engagement process, and is separate to this consultation. This process began in mid-2021 and is a core part of work for the NPS-FM. An important direction by mana whenua entities has been their exercise of mana whakahaere and rangatiratanga. The summary of feedback, including local board views will be shared with mana whenua.

86.     A range of mataawaka groups from across the rohe were invited to share their views through the consultation.

87.     Five per cent of respondents identified as Māori in the feedback received.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

88.     There are no direct financial implications associated with receiving this report. The freshwater implementation programme, including the consultation, are factored into council’s usual budgeting procedures.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

89.     There are no direct risks associated with receiving this report.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

90.     Local board feedback will be included in a consultation summary for the Political Working Group and the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Consultation questions

111

b

Summary of consultation feedback, including feedback by local board area

117

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Raewyn Curran - Senior Policy Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid -  General Manager Plans and Places

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 







Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


















































































Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Local board input to Auckland Council Submission on the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024-2034

File No.: CP2024/02447

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To invite local boards to provide their views on the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024-2034 to inform an Auckland Council submission to the Ministry of Transport.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Ministry of Transport has released a new draft of the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024 (GPS 2024) (refer to Attachment A of the agenda report) for public consultation, replacing the draft GPS 2024 released in August 2023. There are many significant differences between this version and the draft released last year which have been summarised in a memo to local boards circulated on 12 March 2024 (refer to Attachment B of the agenda report).

3.       The GPS sets out the government’s land transport strategy and priorities for the next decade and is updated every three years. It outlines what the government expects to achieve in land transport, along with how much funding will be provided and how this funding will be allocated across the different aspects of the land transport system.

4.       A key focus of the draft GPS 2024 is the government’s direction on how $20 billion in funding from the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) will be allocated over the next three years. Funding allocations are shaped by four proposed strategic priorities:

·        economic growth and productivity

·        increased maintenance and resilience

·        safety (particularly policing and enforcement)

·        value for money.

5.       The proposed funding allocations across the 12 activity classes in the draft GPS 2024, in combination with a much more directive approach to how funds in certain classes are to be used, will increase funding for the construction and maintenance of state highways and local roads, while potentially decreasing funding for several other aspects of the land transport system, including walking, cycling, public transport, rail services and infrastructure-based safety interventions.

6.       There are a range of significant implications for Auckland, both direct and indirect, along with the risk that some of the proposed changes may have unintended consequences. The proposal to require multi-modal projects to apply for funding from multiple activity classes is a reversal of the trend in recent GPS towards more integrated transport planning, funding and delivery.

7.       Topics including equity, accessibility and Māori outcomes, which feature prominently in Auckland Council’s plans and strategies, are absent from the draft GPS. The proposed approaches to transport emissions reduction and road safety also differ significantly from the previous edition of the GPS as well as the Auckland Council group’s plans and strategies.

8.       Previous versions of the GPS have included a commitment to a joint transport planning and prioritisation process with Auckland Council, such as the Auckland Transport Alignment Project (ATAP). The draft GPS 2024 does not include any mention of ATAP or a potential Integrated Transport Plan for Auckland.

9.       A template for local board feedback has been provided (refer to Attachment C of the agenda report).

10.     A summary of the key dates for preparing council’s submission is as follows:

Date

Action

11 March 2024

Memo circulated to elected members

20 March 2024

Transport and Infrastructure Committee Workshop on draft GSP 2024

22 March 2024

Staff complete draft submission and circulate to elected members

28 March 2024

Deadline for feedback from local boards

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      provide / whakarite local views on the draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport 2024-34 discussion document as per the feedback template provided to inform the council’s submission.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

19 March 2024 - Devonport-Takapuna Local Board business meeting - Draft Government Policy Statement on land transport 2024-34

201

b

19 March 2024 - Devonport-Takapuna Local Board business meeting - Memo Consultation on the new draft GPS on Land Transport 2024

245

c

19 March 2024 - Devonport-Takapuna Local Board business meeting - GPS Land Transport - Local Board Feedback template

261

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kat Ashmead - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Local Board Services

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 












































Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 
















Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 




Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Update on Watercare and Eke Panuku work programmes for Quarter Three (Jan - Mar 2024) and CCO Engagement Plans

File No.: CP2024/02262

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the local board with an update on Watercare and Eke Panuku work programmes for Quarter Three (Jan-Mar 2024) as well as a general update on the CCO Engagement Plans.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The 2022/2023 CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans were adopted in June 2022. These plans record CCO responsibilities and local board commitments with Auckland Transport, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland and Watercare.

3.       CCOs provide local boards with the CCO work programme in their area. Each work programme item lists the engagement approach with the local board, activity status, updates and milestones anticipated for the next quarter.

4.       The engagement plans expired in June 2023 and have not been updated since June 2022.

5.       The plans have not been updated due to:

·    impacts from the Annual Budget 2023/2024

·    disruptions from the Water Services Reform Programme

·    Auckland Transport’s work on local transport plans (Kōkiri)

·    lack of dedicated support from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited to support local board engagement and liaison following Annual Budget 2023/2024 impacts.

6.       The Joint CCO Engagement Plans will be reviewed mid-2024.

7.       This report does not include work programme updates from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited or Auckland Transport.

8.       Auckland Transport will provide their work programme updates through the Kōkiri reporting in March and April 2024.

9.       This report provides an update on Eke Panuku and Watercare work programme items from January to March 2024.  

10.     The next CCO quarterly report will be provided in June 2024.  

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      whiwhi / receive the update on Council-controlled Organisation Engagement Plans and Watercare and Eke Panuku work programmes for Quarter Three (Jan-Mar 2024).

Horopaki

Context

What are CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans?

11.     The 2020 Review of Auckland Council’s council-controlled organisations recommended that CCOs and local boards adopt an engagement plan to:

·    help cement CCO and local board relations

·    agree on a common understanding of accountability between CCOs and local boards

·    coordinate CCO actions better at the local level.

12.     These plans record the commitment between Auckland Transport, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, Eke Panuku Development Auckland, Watercare and the local boards to work together.

13.     Each local board adopted their 2022/2023 CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans in June 2022. These plans include CCO responsibilities and local board commitments.

CCO work programme items

14.     CCOs provide local boards with a work programme that lists the different CCO projects happening in the local board area.

15.     The work programme is not a full list of projects in the local board area. It includes work programme items for engagement purposes.

16.     The engagement approach is based on the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) standards which are provided in Table 1 below. Note that the “involve” and “empower” categories are not included in the CCO reporting as decided when the joint engagement plans were adopted.

Table 1: International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Engagement Approach Levels

CCO engagement approach

Commitment to local boards

Inform

CCOs will keep local boards informed.

Consult

CCOs will keep local boards informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how local board input influenced the decision. CCOs will seek local board feedback on drafts and proposals.

Collaborate

CCOs will work together with local boards to formulate solutions and incorporate their advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

 

17.     Local boards received the last update to the CCO work programme and engagement approach in October 2023.

CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans will be reviewed mid 2024

18.     The CCO Local Board Joint Engagement Plans expired in June 2023. The plans have not been updated since June 2022.

19.     The plans have not been updated due to:

·    impacts from the Annual Budget 2023/2024

·    disruptions from the Water Services Reform Programme

·    lack of dedicated support from Tātaki Auckland Unlimited to support local board engagement and liaison following Annual Budget 2023/2024 impacts.

20.     Auckland Transport is currently rolling out work which future engagement plans would need to consider, such as:

·    Forward Works Programme (full list of Auckland Transport projects in the local board area)

·    Local Board Transport Capital Fund

·    Regional Land Transport Plan

·    Local Board Transport Plans (Kōkiri).

21.     The CCO Accountability Policy will be updated as part of the next Long-term Plan which the CCO engagement plans would need to align. 

What are the next steps?

22.     The CCO quarterly reporting will continue to provide work programme updates from Watercare and Eke Panuku with the next report in June 2024.

23.     Local board staff will continue to liaise with Tātaki Auckland Unlimited on what engagement and reporting resource they are able to provide to local boards following their restructure.

24.     Auckland Transport will provide updates on their work programme through the Kōkiri reporting in March and April 2024. 

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

25.     The following sections provide an update on work programme items for Eke Panuku and Watercare. 

26.     Eke Panuku’s work programme items are provided in Attachment A.

27.     Watercare’s work programme items are provided in Attachment B.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28.     This report does not have a direct impact on climate, however the projects it refers to may.

29.     Each CCO must work within Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework. Information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30.     Local boards advise CCOs of issues or projects of significance, communicate the interests and preferences of their communities and allow for flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31.     This report on the CCO work programme items provides the communication of up-to-date information from CCOs to local boards on projects in their area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32.     This report does not have a direct impact on Māori, however the projects it refers to will.

33.     Local boards and CCOs provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to their decision-making processes. These opportunities will be worked on a project or programme basis. 

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34.     This report does not have financial impacts on local boards.

35.     Any financial implications or opportunities will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36.     Some local boards expressed concern over the quality of CCO work programme reporting in April and July 2023, in particular with Auckland Transport. Auckland Transport is currently working on a relationship project which has objectives to deliver:

·    an enhanced process to develop transport plans that reflect local board input and priorities

·    more consistent and timely reporting, updates and analysis on local projects and issues

·    improved support for communication and engagement with local communities.

37.     Auckland Transport will be reporting to local boards in March and April 2024 on priorities for local transport plans (Kōkiri).

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

38.     The local board will receive the next Watercare and Eke Panuku work programme report in June 2024.

39.     The CCO Engagement Plans will be reviewed in mid-2024.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Eke Panuku Development Auckland work programme update

269

b

Watercare work programme update

271

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Maclean Grindell - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Amendment to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board meeting schedule for 30 April 2024

File No.: CP2024/02410

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To seek approval for a change of start time for the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Business meeting scheduled for Tuesday, 30 April 2024, 10.00am.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board approved the addition of three meeting dates to the 2022-2025 Devonport-Takapuna Local Board meeting schedule at their 17 October 2023 business meeting (resolution number DT/2023/193), to accommodate the 10-year Budget 2024-2034 and the Annual Budget 2024-2025 timeframe:

i)        Tuesday, 28 November 2023, 10.00am

ii)       Tuesday, 30 April 2024, 10.00am

iii)      Tuesday, 11 June 2024, 10.00am.

3.       The Devonport-Takapuna Local Board also approved at their 28 February 2023 community forum meeting (resolution number DTCF/2023/5) the meeting schedule for community forums for the 2022-2025 electoral term:

2023

28 February 2023

2 May 2023

27 June 2023

29 August 2023

31 October 2023

2024

27 February 2024

30 April 2024

24 June 2024

27 August 2024

29 October 2024

2025

25 February 2025

29 April 2025

24 June 2025

26 August 2025

New term

 

4.       To avoid a scheduling conflict, the local board is being asked to approve an amendment to the start time for the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board business meeting scheduled to be held on Tuesday 30 April 2024, so that;

i)        A community forum meeting can be held at 10.00am on Tuesday 30 April 2024, as resolved at the 28 February 2023 community forum meeting.

ii)       The business meeting can be held following the Community Forum meeting on Tuesday 30 April 2024, so the 10-year Budget 2024-2034 and the Annual Budget 2024-2025 timeframes can still be met.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      approve an alteration to the 2022-2025 Devonport-Takapuna Local Board meeting schedule for the business meeting on Tuesday, 30 April 2024, to now commence at 1.00pm.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.    

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Chairpersons' Report

File No.: CP2024/02246

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the opportunity for the Chairperson of the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board to provide updates on the projects and issues relevant to the board.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      receive and thank Chairperson van Tonder for her report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Toni van Tonder - Chairs Report - 19 March 2024

277

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 




Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Elected Members' Reports

File No.: CP2024/02258

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the opportunity for the members of the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board to provide updates on the projects and issues they have been involved in since the December 2023 business meeting.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      receive and thank member Gavin Busch for their written report.

b)      receive and thank member Melissa Powell for their written report.

c)      receive and thank member George Wood for their written report.

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Gavin Busch - Members Report - 19 March 2024

283

b

Melissa Powell - Members Report - 19 March 2024

287

c

George Wood - Members Report - 19 March 2024

291

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 





Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 





Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 










Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Resolutions Pending Action report

File No.: CP2024/02404

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board with the status and update of all resolutions that are pending action from staff.

Whakarāpopototanga matua                          

Executive summary

2.       This is a regular information-only report which aims to provide greater visibility of actions that the local board have requested of operational staff.

3.       Note that, unlike an agenda report, staff will not be present to answer questions about the items referred to in this report. Local board members should direct any questions to the local board support staff.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      note the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board resolutions pending action report as at 11 March 2024.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Devonport-Takapuna Resolutions Pending Action - March 2024

303

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 



Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 



Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - Resource Consent Applications - February 2024

File No.: CP2024/02395

 

  

 

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

Attached is the list of resource consent applications related to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area received from 4 February 2024 to 2 March 2024.

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      note the list of resource consents applications (Attachment A) related to the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board area received from 4 February 2024 to 2 March 2024.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - Resource Consent Applications - February 2024

307

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 



Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Devonport-Takapuna Local Board - Record of Workshops February 2024

File No.: CP2024/02373

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide a record of Devonport-Takapuna Local Board workshops held during February 2024.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       At the workshop held on 13 February 2024, the board was briefed on:

·    CCO/External Partnerships

-     BID’s annual update

·    Parks & Community Facilities

-     Local Parks Management Plan development

·    Local Board Services

-     Long-term plan engagement events

3.       At the workshop held on 20 February 2024, the board was briefed on:

·    Recovery Office

-     Recovery Office update

·    Governance

-     Reorganisation and representation review

4.       At the workshop held on 27 February 2024, the board was briefed on:

·    Auckland Transport

-     Ferry service update

·    Governance

-     Reorganisation and representation review

5.       Records of these workshops are attached to this report. The full workshop records are also available on the Auckland Council website.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      receive the records of the workshops held in February 2024.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

13 February 2024 Workshop Record

311

b

20 February 2024 Workshop Record

315

c

27 February 2024 Workshop Record

319

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 





Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 




Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 





Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

Hōtaka Kaupapa - Policy Schedule

File No.: CP2024/02399

 

  

 

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1.       To provide an update on reports to be presented to the Board for 2024.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2.       The Hōtaka Kaupapa – Policy Schedule (formerly known as the Governance Forward Work Calendar) was introduced in 2016 as part of Auckland Council’s quality advice programme. The schedule aims to support local boards’ governance role by:

·    ensuring advice on meeting agendas is driven by the local board priorities.

·    clarifying what advice is expected and when it will be provided.

·    clarifying the rationale for reports.

3.       The schedule also aims to provide guidance to staff supporting local boards and greater transparency for the public. The schedule is updated monthly, reported to local board business meetings, and distributed to council staff.

4.       The March 2024 Hōtaka Kaupapa – Policy Schedule for the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board is provided as Attachment A. The information contained within this attachment is as accurate as possible at the time of reporting.

 

 

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board:

a)      note the Devonport-Takapuna Local Board Hōtaka Kaupapa – Policy Schedule for March 2024 as set out in Attachment A of this agenda report.

 

 

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.

Title

Page

a

Hōtaka Kaupapa – Policy Schedule March 2024

325

     

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Henare King - Democracy Advisor

Authoriser

Trina Thompson - Local Area Manager

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 




Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

 

Item 8.1      Attachment a    Pacific Padel presentation                             Page 333

Item 8.1      Attachment b    Letter of Support from Devonport Squash Club Page 339


Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 







Devonport-Takapuna Local Board

19 March 2024

 

 

 



[1]At pages 66, 134

[2] Wahanga tuatoru: Ngā Kawenga Whakatau-Kaupapa a te Tira Kāwana me ngā poari ā-rohe | Section Three: Decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council's Governing Body and local boards.

[3] Category A places have exceptional overall heritage significance to the Auckland region or a greater geographic area.

[4] Municipal purposes are activities that would normally be expected as the council’s core business. For example: parks, open space provision, libraries, community centres.

[5] See AUP ‘effectiveness and efficiency monitoring reports’ at Auckland Unitary Plan monitoring