Agenda of Albert-Eden Local Board - Thursday, 22 August 2024

1 Nau mai | Welcome

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) whakaae / accept the apology from Member L Roe for absence.

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 Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the minutes of its ordinary meeting held on Thursday, 25 July 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 Albert-Eden Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Deputation - Raise Up, Youth Development

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable an opportunity for Brandon Phillips - Youth Programme Coordinator, Raise Up Youth Development, to deliver a presentation during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Brandon Phillips - Youth Programme Coordinator, Raise Up Youth Development, will be in attendance to provide the local board with an update on the group’s recent activities over the past 12 months, in particular its Youth Development Programme.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) thank Brandon Phillips - Youth Programme Coordinator, Raise Up Youth Development, for his attendance and Deputaton presentation regarding the group’s recent activities over the past 12 months, in particular its Youth Development Programme.

8.2 Deputation - Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable an opportunity for Dr Erica Hinckson, Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group, to deliver a presentation during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Dr Erica Hinckson, Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group, will be in attendance to introduce the local board to the community group’s work and community wellbeing research findings.

3. The Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group was created with the assistance of the Auckland University of Technology (AUT) Te Hotonga Hapori research team, as part of the ‘Community Wellbeing and Lived Experiences’ project. The community group’s mission is to effect change and enhance the wellbeing of the local area by forming a stronger community identity and making local neighbourhoods more habitable for all residents.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) thank Dr Erica Hinckson, Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group, for her attendance and Deputation presentation regarding the Wesley Advocacy Community Action Group’s local community work and community wellbeing research findings.

8.3 Deputation - Murray Reade - Chief Executive Officer, Cornwall Park Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To enable an opportunity for Murray Reade - Chief Executive Officer, Cornwall Park Trust, to deliver a presentation during the Deputation segment of the business meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Murray Reade - Chief Executive Officer, Cornwall Park Trust, will be in attendance to provide the local board with a general overview of the trust’s history and recent activities, as well as future plans, as part of the trust’s engagement strategy.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) thank Murray Reade - Chief Executive Officer, Cornwall Park Trust, for his attendance and Deputation presentaton regarding the trust’s history and recent activities, as well as future plans.

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.”

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Local board views on Plan Change 94 (Private) Wairaka Precinct, Mount Albert

File No.: CP2024/11063

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on a private plan change request by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (‘MHUD’) at Carrington Road, Mount Albert.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

3. Private Plan Change 94: Wairaka Precinct (‘PC94’) relates to a 64.5ha block of land contained by Carrington Road, the Northwestern Motorway, Te Auaunga /Oakley Creek and a series of local side roads and properties in the Woodward Road corridor in the south. The land is identified as being within the Wairaka Precinct in the AUP. The private plan change request made by MHUD seeks changes to existing zonings, the most significant of which proposes to rezone land from ‘Special Purpose: Tertiary Education’ to ‘Business - Mixed Use’ zone. There are also changes proposed to the Wairaka Precinct provisions the most significant being identifying areas within the precinct where additional height can be accommodated, changes to the boundaries of the precinct plan sub-precincts and proposed changes to the areas identified for open space.

4. PC94 was publicly notified on 16 November 2023 with the submission period closing on 2 February 2024. The Summary of Decisions Requested (‘SDR’) was notified on 18 April 2024, with the further submission period closing on 3 May 2024.

5. The SDR provides a summary of the ‘primary’ submissions received (with primary submissions attached). There are 230 primary submissions to be considered. Main issues raised relate to open space, transport, lack of educational facilities, lack of other facilities / infrastructure, trees, lack of a master plan, built form (including height), the precinct name, ecology and heritage.

6. A local board can present local views and preferences when expressed by the whole local board. This report is the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on PC94. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) provide local board views on Plan Change 94 by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development at Carrington Road, Mount Albert.

b) appoint a local board member and / or a local board member and other representative to speak to the local board views at a council hearing on Plan Change 94.

c) delegate authority to the chairperson of Albert Eden Local Board to make a replacement appointment in the event the local board member appointed in resolution b) is unable to attend the private plan change hearing.

Horopaki

Context

7. Each local board is responsible for communicating the interests and preferences of people in its area regarding the content of Auckland Council’s strategies, policies, plans, and bylaws. Local boards provide their views on the content of these documents. Decision-makers must consider local boards’ views when deciding the content of these policy documents (ss15-16 Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009).

8. A private plan change request will be included in the AUP if it is approved (or approved with modifications). Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on private plan change requests – when an entity other than the council proposes a change to the AUP.

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

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

11. This report provides an overview of the private plan change, and a summary of the key themes raised in submissions.

12. This report does not recommend what the local board should convey, if the local board expresses its views on PC94. The planner must include any local board views verbatim in the evaluation of the private plan change. The planner cannot advise the local board as to what its views should be, and then evaluate those views.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. The existing Wairaka Precinct covers a 64.5ha block of land contained by Carrington Road, the North Western Motorway, Te Auaunga /Oakley Creek and a series of local side roads and properties in the Woodward Road corridor in the south. The Pt Chevalier town centre lies a short distance to the north and the Mt Albert town centre lies to the south. Figure 1 below shows the site, with the current Wairaka Precinct boundaries overlaid.

Figure 1 – Plan change area (current sub-precinct boundaries shown)

14. The land has two distinctive parts:

i) The northern portion contains large institutional buildings. Apart from on the Mason Clinic site, there has been little new construction in this area - Unitec operated out of existing buildings which are no longer required for tertiary education. Notably, this part of the site includes the former Oakley Hospital Building, which is a scheduled heritage building - no change is proposed to that scheduling. It also contains the Mason Clinic complex of buildings (sub-precinct A) and the Taylors Laundry site (sub-precinct B).

ii) The southern portion was developed with new Unitec buildings - the core campus now operates in that portion of the precinct. There are also some temporary buildings which are no longer required for tertiary education purposes, and which have been sold to the Crown via MHUD.

15. The current Wairaka Precinct was re-examined quite closely through the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) process, with the PAUP notified for submissions in September 2013. The Council made its decisions on independent hearings panel recommendations on the PAUP in 2016. The Wairaka Precinct Provisions provide for land uses in accordance with the various zonings. Buildings along Carrington Road and adjoining the Open Space - Conservation Zone are limited to a height of 18m with the height allowance elsewhere generally being 27m (less in the MHU zone). The provisions also include caps on dwelling and retail floorspace and there are various other standards including for tree protection.

16. Circumstances have since changed quite significantly with the consolidation of Unitec activities and a government process which will result in the subject land being released and subsequently developed by three Rōpū as part of a Treaty Settlement redress package under the Collective Redress Deed/Act. The three Rōpū represent 13 iwi / hapū parties, being:

· Waiohua-Tāmaki Rōpū - Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Marutūāhu Rōpū - Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Paoa, Ngāti Tamaterā, Ngāti Whanaunga, Te Patukirikiri; and

· Ngāti Whātua Rōpū - Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua and Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara.

17. A number of fast-track consents have been issued under the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020, with one still being processed.

· Wairaka stream daylighting – (completed)

· Te Auaunga stormwater outfall - (completed)

· Backbone infrastructure works – (under construction)

· Global contamination remediation – (to be utilised for all land disturbance works across the Project area)

· Carrington Megalot Subdivision a series of seven megalots for subsequent development and other amenity lots

· Wairaka Stage 1 Residential Development - bulk earthworks and infrastructure, a proposed 50 unit residential development, subdivision and other associated works

· Maungārongo RC1 - two mixed-use buildings containing 381 apartments, retail and office premises with associated landscaping and parking on Carrington Road

· Maungārongo RC2 - four abutting mixed-use buildings containing 266 residential apartments, and retail premises on Carrington Road

· Maungārongo RC3 - five abutting mixed-use buildings containing 274 residential apartments, 4 office spaces, 3 retail premises

· Te Whenua Haa Ora five residential apartment buildings from 4 to 10-storeys with a total of 509 residential apartments (currently being processed).

18. Figure 2 shows the location of approved developments 6 – 10 in the list above.

Figure 2 Location of Fast-Track Consents / Application

19. Private Plan Change 75 (‘PC75’) has sought to re-zone 3A and 119A Carrington Road from Business – Mixed Use zone to Special Purpose – Healthcare Facility and Hospital zone, and to amend provisions and plans in the Wairaka Precinct. The Mason Clinic complex is at the back of the precinct and the Mason Clinic currently gains access and infrastructure through a series of easements. Ultimately many of these easements will be extinguished when the Road infrastructure work is completed and vested as public roads – the Mason Clinic will have legal road frontage and inground infrastructure to the gate. PC75 was approved (with modifications) by a panel of Council-appointed independent hearings commissioners, and the decision was publicly notified on 13 October 2023. The decision was appealed (relating to open space matters) by MHUD. The local board will be updated on that appeal matter at the meeting.

Plan Change overview

20. In summary the application documents outline what are seen as being the following seven key elements to PC94 (see figure 4 below):

i) Rezoning of land acquired by MHUD from Unitec from ‘Special Purpose: Tertiary Education’ to ‘Business - Mixed Use’ zone. This land is primarily intended for residential development but would enable a mix of ancillary activities to create an integrated community

ii) Rezoning of land from ‘Residential – Terrace Housing and Apartment Buildings’ to ‘Business - Mixed Use’ zone. This block of land is on the western boundary and currently has a split zoning. Rezoning of a strip of land from Special Purpose: Tertiary Education’ to Residential – Mixed Housing Urban zone. This land adjoins an existing Residential-Mixed Housing Urban zone in the southern part of the precinct

iii) Amendments to the precinct provisions to promote Māori economic development as a key objective for the precinct

iv) Identification of areas within the precinct where additional height can be accommodated. This is intended to enable the precinct to deliver a higher yield than might otherwise occur in the underlying zone, therefore contributing to the Council’s growth strategy, as well as more variety in urban form

v) In areas where higher buildings are allowed, additional development controls around wind, separation of buildings, and the maximum dimension of floor plates are introduced

vi) Detailed design criteria intended to ensure all buildings, and particularly the higher buildings, achieve a high quality of design and functionality

vii) Amendments to the precinct provisions to equitably redistribute retail provision within the precinct (excluding Sub-Precinct A – the Mason Clinic) due to the redistribution of land from the Special Purpose: Tertiary Education Zone to zoning that enables housing development. The existing overall total gross floor area of retail (including food and beverage and supermarket) of 6500m2 for the whole precinct is maintained.

21. The proposed zonings sought are depicted in Figure 3 below, noting that there will be some amendments to the zonings within the precinct, when the Council’s decision on PC75 is made operative.

Figure 3 – Proposed rezoning

22. The proposed amendments to the Wairaka precinct plan 1 are shown in Figure 4 below.

A map of a city

Description automatically generated

Figure 4 – Proposed Precinct Plan

23. The proposed building heights plan is shown in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5 – Proposed Heights Plan

24. As well as expanding the area available for residential development PC94 seeks to increase the height of buildings in proposed areas as follows^{^[1]}:

· Height Area 1 - operative a height of 27m to proposed a height of 35m plus three buildings of heights 43.5m, 54m and 72m

· Height Area 2 - operative a height of 27m to proposed a height of 35m,

· Height Area 3 – operative a height of 11m apart a 10m wide strip alongside the southern boundary which is a height of 8m to proposed a height of 11m across all of Height Area 3 (i.e. including the 10m wide strip alongside the southern boundary)

· Height Area 4 - operative a height of 27m apart a 20m wide strip alongside Carrington Road which is a height of 18m to proposed a height of 27m across all of Height Area 4 (i.e. including the 20m wide strip alongside Carrington Road).

25. In terms of “yield” the Applicant has estimated 2,500 dwellings plus 1,000 student units would be possible under the current precinct provisions. Their estimate for PC94 is a total of about 4618 dwellings. These changes are seen as providing for a population of up to approximately 12,500 people – approximately an additional 4,500 more people than enabled by the current zoning / precinct. It is noted these figures are the subject of submission points and will be further examined through the hearings process.

26. The plan change includes technical reports that evaluate the proposed zoning, including infrastructure, traffic, urban design, economics, ecology, and cultural values, as well as geotechnical and environmental assessments. The reports and other application details are available from council’s website at PC 94 (Private): Wairaka Precinct

27. Council’s planner, and other experts, will evaluate and report on:

· technical reports supplied by the applicant

· submissions

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

Strategic planning context

28. A rezoning of the Special Purpose - Tertiary Education zone to Business - Mixed Use zone recognises the consolidation that has occurred of the UNITEC campus. The Private Plan Change application documents state that the proposed rezoning to Business - Mixed Use zone will allow the opportunity to create a core residential neighbourhood complemented with services such as retail and some employment opportunity embedded within the community – what is described as a ‘whole community’ concept. It is further stated that the AUP already contemplates further intensification in the Wairaka Precinct and that the level of development is increased due to the additional residential land area added. The proposal is considered by MHUD to be consistent with the National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 – updated May 2022 (‘NPSUD’) and the AUP’s Regional Policy Statement (‘RPS’)^{^[2]}. Both the NPSUD and the RPS promote residential intensification, including mixed use development, in locations near town centres or that are well served by public transport and other transport modes.

29. At the closest points the precinct is located about 500m from the Mt Albert town centre and 100m from the Pt Chevalier town centre. It is also adjacent to major bus routes along Carrington Road. The proposal has been developed to enable a variety of homes and also to enable Māori to express their cultural traditions and norms. The extent to which PC94 as proposed will give effect to the relevant provisions of the NPSUD and RPS will be tested through the hearings process.

30. Plan Change: Intensification (‘PC78’) is the council intensification planning instrument required to incorporate the medium density residential standards (‘MDRS’) into relevant residential zones, and to give effect to policies 3 and 4 of the NPSUD. PC78 was notified on 18 August 2022 and is part way through the statutory intensification streamlined planning process. A submission from Auckland Council on PC94 seeks that the proposed provisions be amended to incorporate the MDRS into the relevant residential zone provisions within the plan change.

Themes from submissions received

31. PC94 was publicly notified on 16 November 2023 with the submission period closing on 2 February 2024. The Summary of Decisions Requested (‘SDR’) was notified on 18 April 2024, with the further submission period closing on 3 May 2024.

32. There are almost 600 submission points raised by a total of 230 submitters. About 170 submitters oppose the plan change and 15 seek amendments. Of the remaining submissions approximately 45 submitters that expressed support for the plan change, most seek amendments.

33. Main issues raised in submissions include:

· Open Space (approx. 128 submission points)

· Transport (50 submission points)

· Lack of Educational Facilities (48 submission points)

· Lack of other facilities / infrastructure (68 submission points)

· Trees (42 submission points)

· Lack of a master plan (32 submission points)

· Built Form (including height) (31 submission points)

· Precinct Name (28 submission points)

· Ecology (23 submission points)

· Heritage (22 submission points).

34. Information on individual submissions, and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters, is available from council’s website at PC 94 (Private): Wairaka Precinct.

35. There have been 15 further submissions received. There is a range of support and opposition to primary submissions, with the majority supporting submissions that oppose PC94 and / or seek amendments to the proposed precinct provisions. It is noted that further submissions are only able to support or oppose primary submissions received and are not able to raise new matters. Therefore, the further submissions do not change the submission themes identified above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

· to adapt to the impacts of climate change by planning for the changes we will face (climate adaptation)

· to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2050 (climate mitigation).

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

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

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

38. Wairaka Precinct is in a central location accessible to public transport, employment and other services. Enhanced opportunities for residential development may assist in reducing vehicle trips and greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gas issues are the subject of developing information, analysis and mechanisms to achieve targets. Climate change concerns have been raised in six submissions, the main concern being future potential for flooding.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

39. The Wairaka Precinct: Stormwater Management Plan (May 2021) has been adopted by Healthy Waters into the Council’s Region-wide Network Discharge Consent.

40. The Wairaka Integrated Transport Assessment approved by the Council in March 2021 sets out how the Site should be served by transport infrastructure and services, noting that the ITA to support this assessment was for less than half the development than would be enabled by PC94 as proposed.

41. Auckland Transport has submitted on the plan change. They have taken a neutral position on PC94, seeking some amendments to the precinct provisions.

42. Watercare Services has submitted on the plan change and have also indicated a neutral position. Amendments are sought to the precinct provisions. It is understood that there is a timing issue in respect of future works to provide for wastewater capacity which will need to be further examined through the hearings process.

43. The proposed changes to the precinct plan through PC94 would reduce the area identified for open space purposes, noting also that the resident population enabled is proposed to increase. It is recognised, including through issues raised in submissions, that the provision and quality of open space, and how open space is to be managed, will be a key issue to be addressed at the plan change hearing. Council Parks representatives are part of the reporting team for the hearing.

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

Local impacts and local board views

44. The private plan change request does relate to matters for which the local board has decision making powers. With particular regard to provision made for open space, which is a key issue to be addressed as part of PC94, the Albert Eden Local Board plan refers to ‘acquire open space where we are able, particularly through large scale developments, and improve existing parks through land exchanges, reconfiguration and improving linkages and connections. (see pages 25 and 26 of plan).

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

· interests and preferences of people in local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

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

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

46. This report is the mechanism for obtaining formal local board views. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on the private plan change.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

47. An important objective in part B.6 Mana Whenua of the AUP’s Regional Policy Statement is that the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi are recognised through Mana Whenua participation in resource management processes. This in turn recognises Mana Whenua as specialists in the tikanga of their hapū or iwi and as being best placed to convey their relationship with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu and other taonga. Ultimately, Mana Whenua values, mātauranga and tikanga need to be properly reflected and accorded sufficient weight in resource management decision-making. An applicant should engage with iwi authorities in preparing a private plan change request, as a matter of best practice. It is also best practice for an applicant to document changes to the private plan change request and/or supporting technical information arising from iwi engagement.

48. The Crown intends to transfer this land to the three Rōpū to enable them to develop the precinct for housing and associated retail and recreational uses to create a new community at this location. This has the potential to provide a number of benefits including the Rōpū being able to manage directly the natural and physical resources of the precinct. Five Mana Whenua groups have submitted in support of PC94, generally on the basis that PC 94 provides the opportunity for development of land will achieve cultural, social and economic objectives for iwi. There is an issue raised about the name of the precinct that will need to be addressed through the hearings process.

49. The planner’s hearing report will include analysis of Part 2 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

50. Financial implications for the local board’s assets or operations include those in relation to the open space issue highlighted above. It is not clear at this stage what those implications may be. Budget parameters are set by the Council Governing Body from Development Contributions collected and reflected in the Long-term Plan in accordance with the Development Contributions Policy 2022.

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

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

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

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

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

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

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

56. The planner will include, and report on, any resolution of the local board in the hearing report. The local board member appointed to speak to the local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing for that purpose.

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

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Michele Perwick - Senior Principal Planner

Peter Reaburn - Consultant Planner

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager Planning and Resource Consents

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Auckland Transport request local board endorse investment case for preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road

File No.: CP2024/11942

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to request that the Albert-Eden Local Board endorse the Auckland Transport (AT) investment case recommending a preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. AT has completed an investment case recommending a preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road to respond to local housing development and wider growth.

3. The investment case is based on technical assessment and consultation feedback from partners, key stakeholders and the community.

4. The preferred option includes separate bus or transit, general traffic and cycle lanes, safety improvements, three new signals required for the development, new landscape and streetscape plans.

5. The estimated cost of the preferred option is $97 to $105 million (P50 to P95) which is within the $113m of funding available through the Government’s Infrastructure Acceleration Fund.

6. Public consultation undertaken for the project on the short list options in 2023 and on the preferred option design in 2024 indicates general support for the proposed improvements.

7. We will continue to address feedback received on the preferred option design and consult with the local board on further design refinements, including the Northwest Cycleway crossing design, in the detailed design phase, which is due to commence later in 2024 with construction expected in 2026.

8. In October 2024 we will seek the AT Board’s approval of the investment case.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) endorse Auckland Transport’s investment case recommending a preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road, incorporating:

i) separate bus or transit lanes in both directions, where space allows

ii) one general traffic lane in either direction

iii) one-way cycleway on either side of the corridor

iv) three new signalised intersections required to support the development

v) additional crossing points

vi) relocated and more direct crossing point for the Northwestern Cycleway

vii) new planting and improved stormwater management.

Horopaki

Context

9. The upgrade of Carrington Road has been brought forward to support the Carrington Residential Development, which is led by three Tāmaki Makaurau Rōpū, facilitated by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and provides 4,000 plus homes over the next 10-15 years on land adjacent to Unitec.

10. The project is being progressed through a grant of $113m through the Government’s Infrastructure Acceleration Fund (IAF), which is administered by Kāinga Ora and accelerates infrastructure needed to support housing delivery.

11. Carrington Road is a 1.6km long primary arterial, frequent bus route, primary walking and major cycling route which connects the Point Chevalier and Mount Albert town centres, and provides access to the Northwestern Cycleway, Mt Albert Train Station, a potential future Point Chevalier Rapid Transit station and local homes, businesses and education providers.

12. The current Detailed Business Case (DBC) makes an investment case for the ‘preferred option’ for upgrading Carrington Road to respond to the local housing development and wider growth in the surrounding area.

13. We have worked with the community over the past 18 months to develop the short list options and the preferred option.

14. The project objectives are to improve safety; user experience; travel choice and access; and liveability, wellbeing and the environment.

15. The draft Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) 2024-34 identifies the Carrington Road upgrade as a ‘priority’ project with an overall ranking of 19.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Investment case for upgrading Carrington Road

16. The investment case recommends a preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road based on technical assessment and feedback received throughout the project from the community, partners and key stakeholders (see Attachment 1 for a summary of engagement).

17. The preferred option (see Attachment 2) accommodates future growth by providing bus or transit lanes, separated cycle lanes, improved walking facilities, three new signals required for the development, safety improvements, and new planting and raingardens.

18. The preferred option responds to feedback received through consultation and consists of the following key features:

· A one-way cycleway on either side of the corridor

· Separate bus or transit lanes in both directions, where space allows

· Three new traffic signals at the Gate 1, Gate 3 and Woodward Road intersections, required for development access and safety, and upgrading of the existing traffic signals at the Gate 4 Unitec entrance

· Two new signalised crossings, one between Wilcott Street and Prospero Terrace, and the other located between Tasman Avenue and Fontenoy Street

· Bus stops located closer to crossing points and to the Mt Albert Train Station

· A relocated and more direct Northwestern Cycleway crossing point, north of Sutherland Road

· Replanting or relocating twice as many trees as are being removed

· Raingardens and improved stormwater management to prevent flooding on side streets

· Widening of the Mt Albert Rail overbridge to provide more space for active modes

· Ensure right turns into/out of side streets can be made safely through providing turning pockets where required and maintaining safe sight distances for turning movements

· Entrance treatments at side roads.

19. The estimated cost of the preferred scheme is $97 million (P50 estimate) to $105 million (P95 estimate), which is within the IAF funding cap.

20. The Benefit-to-Cost ratio is 4.0, providing value for money and a cost-efficient scheme.

21. Key benefits of the preferred option compared against the Do Minimum^{^[3]} include:

· Safety benefits from providing a protected cycleway, controlled access points and crossings, and entrance treatments at side roads

· Improved bus reliability and travel times due to the separated bus or transit lanes and more efficient spacing of bus stops on the corridor

· More accessible public transport by locating bus stops closer to crossings and to the Mt Albert Train Station

· Improved general traffic travel times by separating bus and general traffic movements and providing right-turning pockets at intersections and side roads where needed

· Enhanced liveability and environmental outcomes through rain gardens, improved stormwater treatment, more trees, shade and amenity.

Refer to Attachment 3 for further detailed reporting on the benefits of the preferred option.

Feedback on the preferred option design

22. In May / June 2024, AT sought feedback from partners, key stakeholders and the community on the design of the preferred option through an online interactive map, an open day, presentations (Local Board, residents association, primary school), meetings (key stakeholders) and workshops (community liaison group, bike user groups).

23. A total of 169 participants provided 512 comments on the preferred option online.

24. While the engagement did not ask participants to express sentiment, two comments indicated general support for the project and four indicated general opposition to the project.

25. The remaining 506 comments provided constructive feedback, focussing on aspects of the design participants wished to indicate support for or aspects they believe AT need to improve, with many suggesting ways on how to improve, drawing on their day-to-day experiences on Carrington Road.

26. Key feedback, to be addressed in the next phase of detailed design, includes:

· Raise the relocated Northwestern Cycleway crossing (including 131 participants online)

· Improve access between Sutherland Road and the Northwestern Cycleway crossing

· Support for raised tables at side road entrances

· Provide additional planting on the corridor

· Make intersections safer for cyclists

· Replace shared path areas with separated walking and cycling facilities

· Retain the parking drop off and pick up area outside Gladstone Primary School

· Improve the lane layout at the Mt Albert Rail Overbridge and consider vehicle widening.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

27. The preferred option contributes to Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan by:

· Supporting compact development with improved transport options and connections

· Bus or transit lanes which allow for increased services and greater uptake of public transport over time as the population grows and wider network improvements take place

· Improving stormwater management and resilience to severe weather events, reducing impacts on side streets and local awa (streams)

· Planting/ re-locating approximately twice as many trees as removing.

28. Transport emissions on Carrington Road are expected to increase due to the population growth; however at a regional level, the preferred option does not increase emissions compared to the Do Minimum (modelled for 2031) while still increasing people throughput.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. Healthy Waters support AT working with the developer to upgrade the stormwater network currently being built to support the housing development so that the network can take stormwater runoff from the future widened Carrington Road.

30. In the next phase, AT will work with Auckland Council on consenting, planting, stormwater management, urban design, and integrating the corridor design with heritage buildings and open space.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. The upgrade of Carrington Road, along with the residential development, will significantly change the look and feel of the corridor for the community.

32. During the DBC, AT engaged with the public twice and regularly engaged with a group of community representatives to ensure that the community is aware of the scale of change and can influence the preferred option and its design.

33. Due to the planned growth and the introduction of new signals, the average corridor journey time at peak times will increase for bus and general traffic compared to today, however the preferred option reduces the impact (refer to Attachment 3).

34. The preferred option aligns with Local Board feedback supporting active mode and bus improvements, relocating the Northwestern Cycleway to make it more direct and convenient, and widening the Mt Albert Rail Overbridge for active modes.

35. Local board feedback to address in the detailed design phase includes:

· Different views on the design of the relocated Northwestern Cycleway crossing, which AT consulted on as a zebra crossing without a raised safety platform in line with current AT policy not to use raised devices on arterial roads^{^[4]}, with some members preferring a raised crossing; others supporting a flush crossing; and some members supporting a signalised rather than zebra crossing

· Explore options for vehicle widening of the Mt Albert Rail Overbridge

· Look at ways to optimise the New North Road intersection

· Consider better signage on the corridor

· Ensure safe separation of cyclists from vehicles in the more constrained sections.

36. AT will continue to attend Local Board workshops in the next phase of detailed design to provide project updates and to consult on design decisions, in particular responding to the above feedback.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

37. The project is working in partnership with Mana Whenua, via AT’s Central Hui, to engage on the design principles, planting strategy, stormwater management approach and corridor design, and will continue this engagement in the next phase.

38. AT has also worked closely with the Rōpū leading the Carrington Residential Development to ensure integration of the corridor design with the development and will continue this engagement in the next phase of detailed design.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

39. There are no financial implications to the local board.

40. The project is fully funded through the Government’s IAF Fund.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Key risks	Mitigations
The community is not confident that the upgrade will accommodate the level of population growth anticipated through the development.	· The preferred option helps to reduce the impact of population growth on journey travel times. · The growth will occur over a long period of time. · The scheme includes bus or transit lanes which can respond to the level of growth and wider network improvements as they occur and enable further mode shift over time.
Congestion at the Mt Albert end of the corridor is difficult to address due to the Rail Overbridge constraints.	· AT will investigate different options in detailed design for the Rail Overbridge and Mt Albert end of the corridor.
Significant community disruption during construction.	· AT will work closely with the developers, utility providers and the community to plan the staging and timing of the works to minimise disruption and keep people well-informed on progress.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

41. In October 2024, staff will request that the AT Board approve the investment case recommending a preferred option for upgrading Carrington Road.

42. Detailed design, planned to start end of 2024 and finish end of 2025, will address feedback received on the preferred option design and confirm further design refinements, including the Northwest Cycleway crossing design and Mt Albert Rail Bridge option.

43. Staff will continue to engage with the community, local board, partners, key stakeholders and individual property owners as detailed design progresses, including attending local board workshops to update the board on the project and to consult on design decisions.

44. Staff will confirm whether the bus priority lanes are bus or transit (T2 or T3) lanes and their hours of operation prior to construction.

45. Construction is expected to start in 2026 to align with the development timeframes.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Attachment 1 – Carrington Road Improvements – Engagement summary	29
b ⇩	Attachment 2 – Carrington Road Improvements – Preferred option overview	31
c ⇩	Attachment 3 – Carrington Road Improvements – Preferred option benefits	33

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Lorraine Stone – Principal Transport Planner

Authorisers

Matthew Rednall – Manager Transport Investment

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Joint traffic bylaw review feedback report

File No.: CP2024/11648

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive feedback from local boards on the review of the joint Auckland Transport (AT) and Auckland Council (AC) traffic-related bylaws.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council both have powers to make traffic-related rules in Auckland.

3. The current rules are set out in several documents: Auckland Transport’s Traffic Bylaw 2012 (https://at.govt.nz/about-us/bylaws/traffic-bylaw-2012), Auckland Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2015 (https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/bylaws/Pages/traffic-bylaw.aspx) and Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 (covering use of vehicles on beaches) (https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/bylaws/Pages/public-safety-nuisance-bylaw.aspx).

4. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council are conducting a review of these bylaws which has found that they are largely effective but that there could be efficiencies and improvements.

5. Auckland Transport seeks local board feedback on the proposed changes which will inform the proposals for future public consultation. Feedback is due by 19 September 2024.

6. After public consultation is completed, local boards will be provided with summaries of public feedback. Further feedback will be sought from local boards.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide feedback on the proposed changes on the review of Auckland Transport (AT) and Auckland Council (AC) traffic-related bylaws outlined in Attachment A of the agenda report.

Horopaki

Context

Traffic bylaws

7. The use of Auckland’s road space, including some beaches and roads in parks, is regulated by national legislation (laws) and by local government rules through bylaws.

8. Both Auckland Transport and Auckland Council have powers to make traffic-related rules in Auckland. The current rules are contained across the following bylaws:

a) Auckland Transport Traffic Bylaw 2012 (covering the requirements for parking and control of traffic on roads under the care, control, or management of Auckland Transport).

b) Auckland Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 (covering traffic management in public places, like parks, beaches, off-street parking facilities (like libraries and community centres) and council-owned car parking buildings).

c) Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 (covering use of vehicles on beaches).

9. Responsibilities for bylaws are allocated by control of the land. Auckland Transport’s rules apply to Auckland’s transport system, while Auckland Council’s rules apply to council-controlled land such as parks and beaches.

10. The bylaws provide a “framework” for regulating vehicle use, traffic and parking on Auckland’s transport system and on council-controlled land. This means that they enable activities like bus lanes to be created. However, the exact locations of the bus lanes are not in the bylaw but are set through resolutions, made later. This works well where there are location-specific needs that change over time.

11. Some topics in the bylaws are not site-specific. This is used where Auckland Transport want the same rule applied everywhere, and do not need a site-specific resolution for instance, to prohibit vehicles from being abandoned on roads or in public places.

Reviewing Auckland’s traffic bylaws

12. A joint review of Auckland’s traffic-related bylaws is being undertaken to ensure they continue to meet the needs of Aucklanders. For example, there have been changes in legislation and technology, and feedback from subject matter experts has indicated that there are things Auckland Transport can do to improve how we use bylaws.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

13. Auckland Transport subject matter experts met with and discuss the traffic bylaw review with the Albert-Eden Local Board at a workshop on 8 August 2024.

14. Before that workshop, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council staff reviewed the bylaws across 18 different topics (listed in Attachment A) to identify if there were problems, whether the bylaws helped address those problems, and if there were any alternatives or improvements.

15. There were five possible options for each topic, which align with the statutory options to respond to the Bylaw review findings – retain, amend, replace and revoke. These are outlined in Attachment A.

16. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council advice to local boards can be summarised in the following set of key findings:

a) the current bylaws are generally effective, ensuring that Auckland’s land transport system connects people and places in a way that is safe, effective and efficient, and protects the environment

b) bylaws regulating vehicle use and parking controls by enabling controls to be set ‘if and where’ required to manage the use of the road space in Auckland have been particularly helpful (for example, to regulate the use of one-way streets, bus lanes and P60 parking spaces by resolution of a delegated authority) but could benefit from minor improvements

c) bylaws regulating vehicles on beaches and off-road parking could be improved to be more effective and efficient. For example, there are no infringement fines for vehicles on beaches and the process to enforce berm parking prohibitions is time consuming and costly

d) bylaws that regulate activities involving vehicles, machinery or equipment that is left, broken down, repaired, advertised or sold on roads or public places are not used. Additionally, reviewers found that other existing legislation and bylaws already address the problems better

e) a bylaw can no longer regulate new speed limits because speed management plans are required to be used instead

f) consideration should be given to the possible benefits of replacing the bylaws with a single bylaw made by both Auckland Transport and Auckland Council. While most of Auckland’s roads are the responsibility of Auckland Transport, the boundaries with Auckland Council controlled roads or public places can be indistinguishable.

17. The summary of the discussion and proposed changes are in Attachment A of this report.

18. At this stage of the review, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council have not finalised any final recommendations and therefore encourage local boards to provide feedback. This feedback will be incorporated in the proposals for the upcoming public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council both support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan and other council climate priorities.

20. During the development of the bylaws, climate impacts were considered because effective bylaws are tool that helps give effect to these strategic directives, for instance:

a) parking restrictions regulated by bylaws can be used to provide clearways and bus lanes that allow for quicker and more reliable public transport

b) controlling vehicle access and use on beaches protects coastal biodiversity

c) the ability to control access by heavy vehicles to unsuitable residential roads or town centres helps to minimise carbon emissions by encouraging them to use arterial routes designed for these vehicles to use efficiently.

21. The bylaws are an ‘enabler’ for climate goals providing the regulatory tools required to enforce a variety of controls that contribute to climate change goals.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. This review is being conducted jointly by Auckland Transport and Auckland Council. Other Council Controlled Organisations provided staff to assist with the initial review to ensure that impacts and their views were considered.

23. The Regulatory and Community Safety Committee discussed the review with staff and endorsed the Findings Report at a meeting on 02 July 2024.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24. Auckland Transport are currently holding workshops with all local boards throughout the month of August. These workshops will provide local boards with an opportunity to receive quality advice about the review and its finding.

25. Further engagement with local boards will be conducted post-public consultation to enable local boards to provide feedback after consideration of the consultation data. The timeframe for this will be communicated later this year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council are committed to meeting their responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

27. Auckland Transport’s Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua in delivering effective and well-designed transport policy and solutions for Auckland. We also recognise mataawaka and their representative bodies and our desire to foster a relationship with them. This plan is available on the Auckland Transport website - https://at.govt.nz/about-us/transport-plans-strategies/maori-responsiveness-plan/#about

28. Using this framework for discussion, Auckland Transport informed iwi about the review in November 2023. The initial engagement was followed by a series of hui in July and August 2024 at which staff provided details of the review.

29. Māori have been informed and provided with opportunities to engage with the review and after public engagement is finished will be engaged with again.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

30. This decision has no financial implications for Albert-Eden Local Board because Auckland Transport funds all projects and programmes.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31. The proposed decision does not carry specific risk for this local board. Bylaw application and enforcement is not a role of local boards and is not funded by local board budgets. This situation means that there is no legal or financial risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. Local board feedback is due by 19 September 2024. After receiving this report, Auckland Transport will review the formal feedback from all local boards.

33. A further period of consideration is planned and on 8 October 2024, Auckland Council’s Regulatory and Community Safety Committee will review the bylaw review’s findings, options and recommendations and approve public engagement.

34. The Governing Body and the AT Board will also review the bylaw review’s findings, options and recommendations and approve public engagement on 24 October 2024 and 29 October 2024, respectively.

35. After public engagement, further local board feedback will be sought. Timelines for this engagement will be communicated after the committee decisions later this year.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Schedule of Review Findings and Proposed Changes	41

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy, Principal Advisor Strategic Relationships, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Response to Ombudsman's recommendation to open workshops by default

File No.: CP2024/09939

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To respond to the recommendations made in the Ombudsman’s report ‘Open for business’ in relation to transparency and workshop practices.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Local board workshops are informal, non-decision-making meetings used for discussions and refining options before formal board decisions.

3. The standard approach to workshops is that they are closed however, the decision to open a workshop can be made by each local board. Currently, six boards allow public observation, and eight release workshop materials proactively.

4. In October 2023, the Ombudsman released a report which found no evidence of decision-making occurring in workshops but noted practices that could undermine transparency. The Ombudsman recommended that workshops should be open by default, with any closures justified on a case-by-case basis.

5. Local boards generally follow best practices aligned with many of the Ombudsman’s recommendations, such as publishing workshop records and releasing information proactively. However, there is variation in how this is applied.

6. In light of the Ombudsman’s report, local board elected members and senior staff with experience in open workshops were asked to provide their views. They reported:

· risks to opening workshops, such as breaching confidentiality, discouraging free and frank discussions, causing public confusion about whether a decision is being made and potential disruption of subsequent community engagement and governance processes; public attendance is also very low for those local boards that do hold open workshops

· benefits of opening workshops, such as supporting transparency and holding elected members accountable, increasing public awareness of council matters, and enabling community connection; there is also a level of public expectation that the Ombudsman’s recommendations will be adopted.

7. To meet the Ombudsman’s expectations for transparency, it is recommended local board workshops default to being open. Staff will update the Best Practice Guidance for the 2025-28 term.

8. Some methods for opening workshops include in-person attendance, live streaming or recording. Staff will explore feasible options if workshops are open.

9. At its 27 June meeting, the Governing Body agreed that from 1 September 2024 the default setting for its workshops will be open to the public unless the relevant chairperson considers it is reasonable to close a workshop in a particular case. It also agreed that the way the workshop will be made open to the public is by recording the workshop and uploading that video to the council’s website.

10. If workshops default to being open, staff will need a period to implement it to ensure staff are properly briefed and systems are in place to deliver. Alternatively, the board may wish to implement this for the start of the 2025-2028 term.

11. The chairperson can open or close a workshop without a board resolution, as it is an informal meeting. However, a decision helps to confirm support of the local board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that to meet transparency, the Ombudsman expects workshops to be open by default.

b) whakaae / agree that workshops will be open to the public by default, unless the chairperson deems it reasonable to close a specific workshop.

c) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that staff are preparing guidance to support an open by default approach into the Best Practice Guidance for the 2025 term.

d) whakaae / agree that the local board will implement an open by default approach by 1 October 2024.

Horopaki

Context

Defining workshops

12. The Governance Manual (Section 10.8) defines elected member workshops as:

· informal, non-decision-making meetings, which are generally closed to the public or media. Workshops support the decision-making process by informing elected members on items prior to making a formal decision.

· a mechanism for staff to seek informal guidance from elected members to improve future advice, including identifying information gaps and discussing options for policy development.

13. Local boards use workshops for informal discussions, brainstorming, scoping draft proposals, unpacking complex topics and refining options for a final decision. Workshops are typically used to enable discussion between elected members, and between elected members and staff. Workshops are also used for cross local board collaboration and for joint discussions between the Governing Body and local board members.

14. Workshops are not used for decision-making and this is made clear to members when elected.

LGOIMA requirements

15. The Local Government Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) promotes the open and public transaction of business at meetings of local authorities.

16. LGOIMA states that a meeting at which no resolutions or decisions are made, is not a meeting for the purposes of setting requirements for local authority meetings. Therefore, there is no statutory requirement that a non-decision-making workshop be open to the public, notified in advance and have minutes taken.

17. Although not required, local boards may hold non-decision-making workshops in open and invite members of the public, media or stakeholders to attend.

18. Through each term’s induction process, elected members are reminded of their obligations to be open and transparent in decision-making. It is made clear to elected members that closed workshops do not replace the decision-making meetings.

Current local board practice

19. Six local boards allow public observation at their workshops. They are Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, Waitākere Ranges, Hibiscus and Bays, Rodney and Waitematā.

20. While the driver for this practice is to demonstrate a commitment to openness and transparency, public attendance has been low.

21. Eight local boards have adopted the practice of proactively releasing workshop materials. They are Devonport-Takapuna, Hibiscus and Bays, Kaipātiki, Puketāpapa, Rodney, Waiheke, Waitākere Ranges and Waitematā.

Best practice guidance

22. At the start of the 2022-2025 term, the Local Board Services Best Practices Review 2022 recommended that workshops should be closed to the public because:

· a non-public setting can better facilitate and support free and frank exchanges between staff and elected members

· workshops do not provide opportunity for the public to give input (in the way that the business meeting provides for a public forum), so the role of the public in the workshop would only be to bear witness to the informal discussions

· attending a workshop may not provide a complete picture of council processes or may lead to some premature assumptions about decisions and projects

· workshops provide a safe space for elected members to assess the overall progress, measure the effectiveness of its work programme and reflect on their own effectiveness as a local board. This type of exercise is unlikely to be robust and less likely to be authentic if done with a public audience.

Ombudsman’s findings

23. In October 2023, the Ombudsman released a report, Open for business, detailing the investigation into the actions and decisions of eight councils regarding both council meetings held under LGOIMA and workshops (and other informal meetings) to which LGOIMA meeting provisions do not apply.

24. The Ombudsman’s review was carried out using their powers under the Ombudsman Act 1975 which allows the Ombudsman to review any act or omission by a local authority – except for a decision made by a full council (i.e., a decision by the Governing Body or a committee of the whole).

25. The purpose of the investigation was to test concerns that councils were using workshops and other informal meetings to make decisions.

26. The eight councils investigated were Rotorua Lakes Council, Taranaki Regional Council, Taupō District Council, Palmerston North City Council, Rangitīkei District Council, Waimakariri District Council, Timaru District Council and Clutha District Council.

27. The Ombudsman’s report highlights the requirement under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) for a local authority to “conduct its business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner”. It also highlights the requirement in the LGOIMA that anything taking place or provided to any meeting is “official information” and subject to the principle of availability, unless there is a good reason to withhold it.

28. The Ombudsman found no evidence of decisions being made in workshops. They did see workshop practices that in their opinion were “counter to the principles of openness and could contribute to a public perception that workshops are not being used in the right way”. These examples included not advertising workshops or having all workshops closed to the public.

29. The Ombudsman also cautioned against using workshops to include a significant component of determination, such as a substantial narrowing of options prior to public consultation.

30. The Ombudsman has provided three principles of good administrative practice, which they consider should guide council workshops:

· Councils have a general discretion to advertise and undertake all meetings in public, and this is consistent with the principle in the LGA that councils should conduct their business in an open, transparent, and democratically accountable manner.

· A general policy of not publicising / closing all non-decision-making meetings, such as workshops, may be unreasonable and / or contrary to law. The Ombudsman can assess this on a case-by-case basis.

· Using closed workshops to do “everything but” make a final decision could be seen as undermining the principles in the LGA and purposes of the LGOIMA and may be unreasonable in terms of the Ombudsmen Act 1975.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Aligning to the Ombudsman’s recommendation

31. The Ombudsman reports that workshops should be open by default as a matter of good practice. Open workshops are consistent with the principles of transparency, openness, and accountability.

32. The Ombudsman recognises there may be good reasons to close a workshop to the public, and that LGOIMA doesn’t require workshops to be open.

33. The six key recommendations made by the Ombudsman in respect of council workshops are:

· adopt a principle of openness by default for all workshops, including a clear commitment to record a clear basis for closure where justified, on a case-by-case basis

· publicise times, dates, venues, and subject matters of all workshops in advance, including a rationale for closing them, where applicable

· provide clear audit trails of all workshops and internal guidance for the keeping of records of workshop proceedings

· publish workshop records on the council website as soon as practicable

· formalise a process for considering the release of information from closed workshops

· consider sign-posting on the council website that members of the public can complain to the ombudsman in relation to the administration of workshops.

34. The Ombudsman’s report is not legally binding on the council. But the Ombudsman has made it clear that open by default is the best practice approach, and they will be closely monitoring decisions on these matters.

35. To meet the Ombudsman’s expectations that workshops are seen to be open, transparent and democratically accountable, it is recommended local boards have a default setting of open for workshops.

How local boards currently adhere to the recommendations

36. Local boards individually set their own meeting practices in accordance with LGOIMA.

37. Local Board Services identifies that many of the existing practices already meet the Ombudsman’s expectations. This includes:

· having a standing report on business meeting agendas which notes the record of any workshops held since the previous meeting

· posting agendas on the council’s website with as much advance notice as possible before meeting dates

· clear and robust practices for keeping of meeting minutes and drafting of public exclusion resolutions

· publication of workshop records on the council’s website as soon as practicable after the workshop

· actively releasing confidential information as soon as practicable, when the reason for withholding has passed

· restating information in subsequent open meetings and keeping records of the workshop.

38. In principle, the holding of closed workshops does not mean that workshops are secret or inconsistent with the principles of transparency and openness. Any lack of transparency can be addressed through the proactive release of workshop information (where possible), restating information in subsequent open meetings and keeping records of the workshop.

39. Governing Body workshops are currently closed to public observation. To address transparency, workshop records are proactively published as part of its next meeting agenda, including presentations and other documentation discussed or made accessible.

40. At its 27 June meeting, the Governing Body agreed that from 1 September 2024 the default setting for its workshops will be open to the public unless the relevant chairperson considers it is reasonable to close a workshop in a particular case. They also agreed that the way the workshop will be made open to the public is by recording the workshop and uploading that video to the council’s website.

41. Staff will incorporate the Ombudsman’s recommendations into the next Local Board Services Best Practice Review, which will inform induction for the 2025-2028 term.

How to implement open workshops

42. Options for open workshops include:

· opening the workshop so the public can attend in-person

· providing remote access via MS Teams link without the public present in the room

· recording workshops without the public present and making available on Auckland Council’s website.

43. Each method for conducting an open workshop has its own risks, benefits, and operational impacts. These are currently being investigated further for each option. The resulting guidance will be included in the 2025-2028 Best Practices Review.

44. Guidance will also include considerations for when to close workshops if operating under a default open workshop approach. The Ombudsman recognises that in some instances it will be reasonable to close workshops to the public and that this should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

45. Should any local boards choose to change to open workshops before the next term begins, staff will assist in this process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

46. The decisions in this report are not expected to have any significant impact on our climate objectives or targets. Staff have not quantified the impact of increased administrative requirements or the likely impact of increased travel requirements for in-person workshop observers.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. As staff are seeking a political decision from local boards on their approach, there has not been a comprehensive consultation with the council group.

48. Senior Governance staff provided views which largely reflect the pros and cons highlighted by elected members with some additional concerns including:

· low public attendance: the benefits of transparency are limited

· communication challenges: keeping the public updated on workshop details can be difficult due to last-minute changes

· reduced input opportunity: local boards may miss the chance to provide early input on topics not ready for public release

· staff exposure: open workshops may make staff vulnerable to inappropriate behavior, especially as their faces are visible to the public and their names may be published by the media.

49. The Ombudsman’s investigation had canvassed a few concerns and potential risks and concluded that while there are good reasons that exist for closing workshops, they did not consider controversy and complexity to be good reasons in themselves.

50. If the decision to open workshops is approved before next term, staff will need an implementation period to ensure the council group is properly briefed and supported.

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Staff have gathered the views from some local board elected members with open workshops to understand their current experiences.

Benefits of open workshops

· Transparency and community connection: media access boosts public awareness of local board business, helps local board members gain recognition, and reduces reliance on social media.

· Access to information: even if public attendance is low, people appreciate the option which fosters a better understanding of decision-making and the ability to follow topics of interest.

Risks of open workshops

· Media sensationalism: can hinder effective governance by swaying decisions based on a few vocal individuals rather than the broader community.

· Public disruption: the presence of the public can alter interactions between board members and staff, leading to potential harassment of staff and reducing the willingness of staff to participate. Public interjections can derail workshop progress and disrupt important relationships, such as those with local iwi and community groups.

· Overemphasis: a small number of vocal attendees can gain disproportionate political influence, overshadowing the broader community's input.

52. Opinions on whether workshops should be open or closed varied. Some elected members preferred closed workshops to create a safe environment for staff, allowing for free and frank discussions in a more relaxed setting. They believed that open workshops often led to political posturing, which could harm the democratic process by giving undue influence to a small number of voices. And they noted negative impacts on subsequent community engagement, such as when the media prematurely releases information. Overall, they felt that the benefits were outweighed by the disadvantages.

53. Conversely, other elected members argued that workshops should be open to ensure transparency and public trust. They believed that the presence of the public generally did not pose significant issues. These chairs felt that board members should be prepared to handle the political environment and potential media exposure and public scrutiny.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. Māori were not consulted on this report. There are no identified direct impacts on Māori arising from this report.

55. Open workshops would provide an opportunity for Māori to observe a workshop but would not provide for an opportunity to engage in the decision-making process and would not go beyond what is already available through invitation by a local board to engage directly on an issue.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

56. There will be financial implications to open workshops, depending on how they are conducted, including time and cost of enabling online access or potentially managing security at a physical meeting. These costs will vary by board, including what technology is currently used, so will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

57. The Ombudsman’s recommendations are non-binding. However, there may be reputational and/or political consequences arising from a failure to act where needed to respond to recommendations from the Ombudsman.

58. The Best Practice Review 2022 notes some risks that should be considered when opening a workshop, such as:

· increasing likelihood of breaching the LGOIMA and the Auckland Council Confidential Information Policy and Protocols through wilful or advertent ‘disclosure of information for which good reason to withhold would exist’

· discouraging free and frank exchange of views between members and provision of advice from staff, which is often necessary in the early stages of a project or idea

· potentially creating misinformation or confusion in the community about the status of projects

· increasing potential for Code of Conduct complaints about predetermination and conflicts of interest if elected members indicate specific preferences in a workshop

· exposing staff to opportunities for harassment and complaints based on comments made when giving free and frank advice to elected members (note Auckland Council has obligations under the Health, Safety and Work Act 2015 to ensure staff are not put at risk while conducting their role).

59. There is also a risk that workshops can be called or cancelled at very short notice. This may impact on members of the public that may plan to attend. Staff will do all they can to keep advertised information about workshops current.

60. Local boards can review their approach in the future if opening workshops by default leads to unintended adverse consequences.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

61. If the local board decide to hold open workshops by default, staff will provide advice on practices, procedures, and information technology to support this decision.

62. If a local board requests to open their workshops before next term, staff will need an implementation period to ensure the council group is properly briefed and supported.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Alyson Roach - Senior Advisor Business Planning & Projects

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Feedback on the representation review initial proposal

File No.: CP2024/11793

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek formal feedback from local boards on the initial representation review proposal.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Governing Body resolved the representation review initial proposal on 27 June 2024 for public notification and consultation outlined in the body of this report and provided in Attachment A.

3. Feedback on Auckland Council’s representation review initial proposal for the 2025 elections was received between 8 July and 8 August 2024.

4. Due to the proximity of the closing date for public feedback (8 August) and local board business meeting dates, this report provides the high-level summary of key themes. The feedback analysis report produced by the Insights team will be provided separately prior to the Albert-Eden Local Board business meeting.

5. At the time of writing this report, approximately 1050 submissions have been received. The final submission numbers will be communicated via the feedback analysis report.

6. Key themes included general support for the proposed changes in the central Auckland wards, North Shore wards, the Howick Local Board subdivision arrangements, and the minor local board boundary changes. Submissions on the proposed changes to the Rodney Local Board subdivisions raised a number of issues to be considered before the council adopts its final proposal.

7. The initial proposal includes a realignment of the Central Auckland ward boundaries of Waitematā and Gulf, Ōrākei, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, and Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa wards with local board boundaries. At a high level, feedback is generally in support of the proposed changes. Those in support generally feel the proposal will improve representation and those opposed generally feel the proposal will divide communities.

8. The next stage is for the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) to review this feedback through a hearings process, which will close with deliberations on whether to recommend any changes to the initial proposal to the Governing Body. The Governing Body will then decide the final proposal on 26 September 2024.

9. Local board chairs who are members of the JGWP are recommended to step aside from participating in decision-making on their board’s formal feedback to enable them to fully participate in the work of the hearings panel.

10. If the local board wishes to provide feedback that the initial proposal should be amended, it is important to include sufficient reasoning for the JGWP to recommend an amendment. The reasoning should be in line with the requirement to consider the effective representation of communities of interest and fair representation (the 10 percent rule).

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the summary of feedback on the representation review initial proposal via memo prior to the business meeting.

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) will hear submissions on the proposal including local board feedback, for a decision by the Governing Body on 26 September 2024.

c) whakarite / provide its formal submission on the proposal.

d) tono / request to speak to its submission in front of the Joint Governance Working Party (JGWP) at the hearing.

Horopaki

Context

Process

11. The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) requires councils to follow a prescribed process within certain timeframes when undertaking a review of the representation arrangements. The proposed process and dates are provided below.

Action	Required timeframe	Planned timeframe
Resolution of initial proposal	By 31 July 2024	27 June 2024
Public notice of initial proposal	Within 14 days of resolving initial proposal	8 July 2024
Public consultation	Period of no less than 1 month	8 July – 8 August 2024
Hearings	-	2 – 13 September 2024
Resolve final proposal	-	26 September 2024
Public notice of final proposal	Within eight weeks of close of submissions	3 October 2024
Receive objections or appeals to final proposal	Period of no less than 1 month	3 October – 3 November 2024
Forward objections or appeals to the LGC for final determination	As soon as practicable but no later than 1 December 2024	4 November 2024
Final determination on proposal from the LGC	No later than 11 April 2025	-

12. The Governing Body confirmed the scope of the initial proposal for the 2025 representation review at its 30 May meeting before finalising and confirming the content of the associated public consultation material at its 27 June meeting. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 8 July to 8 August.

13. This report provides a summary of the key themes from feedback (including local board feedback, if made) and enables local boards to make a formal response to the initial proposal and other feedback via business meeting resolutions.

14. The Local Electoral Act 2001 requires the council to ensure that any person who makes a submission on the initial proposal is given a reasonable opportunity to be heard by the council.

15. The JGWP has been appointed as the panel to hear those that wish to speak to their written submissions over four days in September, including the 6 September to hear local board feedback and 13 September to deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body.

16. The JGWP recommendations will be reported to the 26 September Governing Body meeting, which will make a final decision on the proposal. If any objections or appeals are received, they will be assessed by the Local Government Commission.

17. A range of engagement events were held during the consultation period, some with a regional focus and some with a focus on local changes being proposed. These events were promoted through local communications, social media, and through the AK Have Your Say website. A full record of all events held during the consultation period is available on akhaveyoursay.nz/represent under ‘drop-in sessions’ and ‘webinars’. The webinar recordings are also available on the webpage.

18. All information relevant to the representation review has been made available through the AK Have Your Say website. In addition to providing access to the initial proposal and consultation documents, the website provided an interactive map with the ability to zoom in to inspect boundary locations. It also provided the events above and all the reports to the Governing Body and local boards, setting out the issues and options.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Representation review initial proposal

19. The Governing Body resolved the representation review initial proposal on 27 June 2024 for public notification and consultation outlined below and provided in Attachment A.

a) Ward boundary / representation changes

i) changes to the Central Auckland ward boundaries (Waitematā and Gulf, Ōrākei, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, and Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa wards) so they match the proposed local board boundary changes while still following the fairness of representation rule, as shown in maps 1.2, 1.3 and 1.4.

ii) enlarge the North Shore Ward to include an area around Bayview, reducing noncompliance with the fairness of representation rule. These changes align the North Shore and Albany ward boundary with boundary changes to Upper Harbour and Kaipātiki local boards, as shown in map 1.5.

iii) Noncompliance of the North Shore Ward, with a -13.82 per cent variance, as compliance would split a community of interest.

b) Local board boundary / representation changes

i) the Rodney Local Board subdivisions will be, as shown in maps 2.1 and 2.2:

A) North Rural, 2 members

B) South Rural, 2 members

C) Warkworth, 2 members

D) Kumeū, 2 members

E) Dairy Flat, 1 member

ii) the total number of members on the Howick Local Board will increase from 9 to 11 members. The subdivisions will be, as shown in map 3:

A) Howick, 3 members (no change)

B) Pakuranga, 3 members (no change)

C) Botany, 2 members (changed area)

D) Flat Bush, 3 members (new subdivision)

iii) minor changes to local board boundaries:

A) the boundary between the Upper Harbour and Devonport-Takapuna local boards will be changed so that all of Saunders Reserve is in the Upper Harbour Local Board area (Map 4.1)

B) the boundary between Kaipātiki and Upper Harbour local boards will run along Sunset Road (Map 4.1)

C) the boundary between Kaipātiki and Upper Harbour local boards in the vicinity of Kereru Reserve will be adjusted such that the parcel of land, Lot 3 DP 142477 (R 14 Kereru Grove), becomes part of the Upper Harbour Local Board area (Map 4.1).

D) the boundary between Kaipātiki and Upper Harbour local boards will be adjusted to include the residential area of Bayview that is north of Glendhu Road in the Kaipātiki Local Board area, noting that meshblocks will need to be adjusted to avoid affecting any reserve area in the Upper Harbour Local Board area (Map 4.1).

E) the boundary between the Puketāpapa and Maungakiekie-Tāmaki local boards will be adjusted such that all Taumanu Reserve lies within the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board area (Map 4.2)

iv) noncompliance with the 10 per cent rule for the following local boards for the reasons given in Attachment A:

A) Hibiscus and Bays

B) Maungakiekie-Tāmaki

C) Ōtara-Papatoetoe

D) Franklin

Feedback on the representation review initial proposal

20. Feedback on Auckland Council’s representation review initial proposal for the 2025 elections was received between 8 July and 8 August 2024.

21. The consultation document, feedback questions and maps are provided in Attachment A to this report.

22. Due to the proximity of the closing date for public feedback (8 August) and local board business meeting dates, this report provides the high-level summary of key themes. The feedback analysis report produced by the Insights team will be provided separately prior to the Albert-Eden Local Board business meeting.

High level summary of feedback

23. At the time of writing this report, approximately 1050 submissions have been received however the final submission numbers will be confirmed at a later date and communicated via the feedback analysis report.

24. Key themes included general support for the proposed changes in the central Auckland wards, North Shore wards, the Howick Local Board subdivision arrangements, and the minor local board boundary changes. Submissions on the proposed changes to the Rodney Local Board subdivisions raised a number of issues to be addressed in the final proposal. Table A summarises key feedback themes.

Table A – proposed changes and summary of feedback

Change type	Change detail	Feedback
Ward boundaries	Central Auckland ward boundaries (Waitematā and Gulf, Ōrākei, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, and Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa wards)	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed boundary changes. Those in support generally feel the proposal will improve representation and those opposed generally feel the proposal will divide communities.
Ward boundaries	North Shore ward boundaries (North Shore and Albany wards)	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed boundary changes. Generally, those in support feel it is a logical proposal and those who do not support disagree with the need for any change.
Ward noncompliance	North Shore ward	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed noncompliance.
Local board subdivisions	Rodney Local Board. Four subdivisions to five. New ‘North’ and ‘South’ rural subdivisions.	Feedback is mixed on the proposed subdivision changes, with the majority in support and the remainder split fairly evenly between ‘do not support’ and ‘I don’t know’. Generally, those in support agree with rural representation and those who do not support disagree with the proposal subdivision boundaries.
Local board subdivisions	Howick Local Board. Three subdivisions to four. Additional subdivision for Flat Bush area.	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed subdivision changes. Generally, those in support agree with creation of Flat Bush subdivision and those who do not support disagree with the need for any change.
Local board members	Howick Local Board. Additional two members for the proposed Flat Bush subdivision.	Feedback included a small number of submissions in support of Flat Bush subdivision, but not the additional members.
Local board boundaries	Minor changes to boundaries across Upper Harbour, Devonport-Takapuna, Kaipātiki, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, and Puketāpapa local boards	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed minor local board boundary changes. Generally, those in support agree with the minor shifts and those who do not support feel there is not enough information.
Local board non-compliance	Hibiscus and Bays, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, and Franklin local boards.	Feedback is mostly in support of the proposed local board noncompliance.

25. Through the consultation on the representation review initial proposal, the council received feedback on matters that are not covered by the representation review scope under the LEA. The key themes for out-of-scope feedback include, but are not limited to:

· support for wider review (including reverting to pre-amalgamation)

· feedback on Māori representation for Auckland Council

· support for a change from First Past the Post to Single Transferable Vote

· requests for more civic education opportunities to better understand council.

Local Board feedback on initial proposal

26. This report provides the mechanism through which local boards may receive both high level feedback and the full analysis report to inform their own submission on the initial proposal.

27. Local board members who are also members of the JGWP are recommended to stand aside from decision-making on their local board feedback to mitigate the risk of a perceived conflict of interest.

28. Local boards will have an opportunity to present their submission during a hearing on the 6 September 2024. Further information will be communicated to the local boards who wish to speak to their submissions.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

29. There are no direct or specific climate change impacts resulting from this report or its implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30. The representation review proposes a number of relatively minor changes to representation arrangements, including to ward and subdivision boundaries, and in the case of the Howick Local Board, two additional members.

31. Should these or any further changes be confirmed, there will be some impact on council staff resourcing, which will mostly be absorbed within the local election work programme.

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

Local impacts and local board views

32. Local boards have been involved throughout the representation review process via their representatives on the JGWP, via workshops and business meeting resolutions.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. The Houkura chair sits on the JGWP and engagement with Māori and mataawaka has been ongoing as part of the process of developing the initial proposal, including the local board reorganisation plan, which is not proceeding.

34. Separate engagement sessions on the consultation material were held with Māori and mataawaka during early July.

35. Feedback from Māori has focused less on the changes proposed through the representation review initial proposal and more on the need for specific Māori representation both on local boards and the Governing Body.

36. The current legislation only contains provisions for Māori representation on the Governing Body, not local boards. On 26 October 2023, the Governing Body decided to not establish Māori wards for the 2025 local elections, acknowledging the need for further work to be undertaken through the JGWP and reported back to the Governing Body by 31 December 2024.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

37. There are no specific or direct financial implications resulting from this report. Should the proposed representation changes proceed at the 2025 local elections, there will be some impact on council budgets.

38. Direct costs associated with election process changes, modification of election material etc will be absorbed within the local election work programme. There will also be consequential costs on council’s systems and processes where matters are shifted from one ward or local board to another. Again, it is expected these would be absorbed within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

39. No specific risks have been identified with this report, which is simply seeking local board views on the representation review. Whatever representation arrangement changes occur as a result of this review will be assessed for risks as part of implementing those changes.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

40. Local board feedback will be considered by the JGWP which has been appointed as the panel to hear feedback in early September and included as appropriate in the working party’s report to the Governing Body.

41. The Governing Body will make decisions on the representation review at it 26 September meeting. Any submitters may lodge objections or appeals to these decisions with the Local Government Commission from 3 October – 3 November, which will make final decisions.

42. Approved representation arrangements will be implemented as part of the October 2025 local elections.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Initial proposal document and feedback form	63

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Libby Hetet – Senior Policy Project Manager Representation Review – Planning and Operations

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Albert-Eden Local Board

22 August 2024

Auckland Council's Quarterly Performance Report: Albert-Eden Local Board for Quarter Four 2023/2024

File No.: CP2024/11367

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the Albert-Eden Local Board with a quarterly performance report for quarter four, 1 April to 30 June 2024 and the overall performance for the financial year against the approved 2023/2024 local board work programmes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report provides an integrated view of performance for the Albert-Eden Local Board and includes financial performance and delivery against work programmes for the 2023/2024 financial year. The work programme is produced annually and aligns with Albert-Eden Local Board Plan outcomes.

3. Forty-nine activities within the agreed work programmes were delivered. Six activities were undelivered, cancelled, put on hold or deferred and seventy-seven projects remain in progress. Ten activities are approved in principle for the work to start during next financial years.

4. Key activity achievements from the 2023/2024 work programme include:

· Renewal of Windmill Park building (ID 19901): the renewal of the Pavilion was delivered. The project has been completed and there was an opening ceremony on 30 April, attended by the local board.

· Grants allocation: the board approved a total of $278,084 into Community (ID 76) and accommodation grants (ID 82).

· Albert - Eden Schools Cultural Festival (ID 1502): The event was successfully delivered on 25 November 2023. It involved performances by students from schools across the local board area. The event celebrates students hard mahi and dedication to learn and embrace diversity, connecting with a range of cultures woven into the community.

· Bike Hub - Albert-Eden (ID 538): During this financial year the Cycle Space has had a total of 265 visitors, 409 volunteer hours, 187 bikes fixed, and 24 bikes rescued from the waste stream.

· Waitītiko / Meola Creek Restoration Albert-Eden (ID 540): during this financial year the programme has supported several community groups and a contractor to undertake restoration work and plant over 1,200 plants along Waititīko Meola creek across the Albert-Eden and Waitematā local board areas.

5. Key activities not delivered / not progressed as expected include:

· Aberfoyle Street - new - link pedestrian path (ID 36656): this project is on hold and its delivery will be deferred to future years.

· Morvern Reserve Concept Plan - progress delivery (ID 20586): this project is on hold as budget has been deferred to financial year 2025/2026.

6. Qualifying budgets of unfinished activities will be carried forward into 2024/2025 work programmes.

7. The financial performance report is attached but is excluded from the public. This is due to restrictions on releasing annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX (high-level summary only) – on or about 29 August 2024.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Albert-Eden Local Board:

a) receive the performance report for quarter four ending 30 June 2024.

b) note the financial performance report in Attachment B of the report will remain confidential until after the Auckland Council Group results for 2023/2024 are released to the New Zealand’s Exchange (NZX) which are expected to be made public on or about 29 August 2024.

Horopaki

Context

8. The Albert-Eden Local Board has an approved 2023/2024 work programme for the following:

· Customer and Community Services

· Infrastructure and Environmental Services.

· Plans and Places.

· Auckland Emergency Management.

9. The graph below shows how the work programme activities meet Local Board Plan outcomes. Activities that are not part of the approved work programme but contribute towards the local board outcomes, such as advocacy by the local board, are not captured in this graph.

Graph 1: Work programme activities by outcome

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Local Board Work Programme Snapshot

10. The graph below identifies each work programme activity by RAG status (Red, Amber, Green and Grey) which measures the performance of each activity.

Graph 2: Work programme performance by RAG status

11. The definitions of the Red, Amber Green and Grey for the quarter four / end of year report outlined in table 1 below.

Table 1: RAG status definitions for quarter four / end of year report

Red	· activities that were not delivered, · activities that were expected to be completed in 2023/2024 which are not expected to be completed until after the first quarter in 2024/2025, · multi-year projects that are significantly delayed, and · activities that are on hold with significant issues.
Amber	· activities that were expected to be completed in 2023/2024 which are now expected to be completed in the first quarter in 2024/2025, · multi-year projects that have not progressed as expected, and · activities that are on hold.
Green	· activities that were completed by the end of the financial year, and · multi-year projects that have progressed as expected.
Grey	· activities have been cancelled or deferred in the period April to June 2024.

12. 124 activities within the approved work programmes have a green RAG status, 10 activities have an amber RAG status, five activities have a red RAG status, and three activities have a grey RAG status.

13. The graph below shows the stage of the activities in each departments’ work programmes. The number of activity lines differ by department as approved in the local board work programmes.

Graph 3: Work programme performance by activity status and department

Key activity updates from quarter four

14. Climate Action Programme Albert-Eden (ID 534): the focus of the quarter was supporting the Albert-Eden and Puketāpapa Eco Festival from 6 April to 5 May. The festival held 170 events across both local boards. Highlights included a climate networking breakfast at Waiōrea community recycling centre and two bike events held in collaboration with the Greenwoods Corner Business Association.

15. Windmill Park building (ID 19901): the renewal of the Pavilion was delivered. The project has been completed and there was an opening ceremony on 30 April, attended by the local board.

16. Local crime prevention fund, safety initiatives investment (ID 3955): during this quarter four agreements were processed with Greenwoods Village Epsom Business Association for lighting improvements at the town centre, Avondale Community Patrols and Epsom Community Patrol for operational costs, and with Neighbourhood Support Auckland towards the community coordinator role, in partnership with the Community Wellbeing Community Partnerships and Investment regional team. Staff are working closely with community partners to achieve objectives outlined in the funding agreements and will provide an update to the local board during a future workshop.

Key activity achievements from the 2023/2024 work programme

17. The key achievements in the delivery of the local board work programmes for 2023/2024 include:

· Albert - Eden Schools Cultural Festival (ID 1502): The Albert-Eden Schools Cultural Festival was successfully delivered on 25 November 2023. It involved performances by students from schools across the local board area. The event celebrates students hard mahi and dedication to learn and embrace diversity, connecting with a range of cultures woven into the community.

· Te Auaunga / Oakley Creek pest plant control buffer programme Albert-Eden (ID 522): This project delivered 102 property visits and 252 square meters of pest plant control. This work will help to protect high value parks and reserves from weed invasion.

· Bike Hub - Albert-Eden (ID 538): The Cycle Space had 265 visitors, 409 volunteer hours, 187 bikes were fixed, and 24 bikes were rescued from the waste stream.

· Ferndale Community House - renew - heritage asset (ID 24014): project completed in July 2023.

· Eric Armishaw Park - renew - coastal pathway (ID 32011): project completed in September 2023.

· Mt Albert Senior Citizens Community Hall - renew - exterior and interior (ID 30122): this project was completed in May 2024.

· Nicholson Park ex Bowling Club - renew - exterior and interior (ID 39614): delivery of this project was completed in June 2024.

· Eden Epsom Playcentre - renew - minor exterior and interior building renewals (ID 39615): project completed in June 2024.

Overview of work programme performance

Customer and Community Services work programme

18. In the Customer and Community Services work programme, there are 115 activities with a green RAG status, nine activities with an amber RAG status, five activities with a red RAG status and three activities with a grey RAG status. Activities with significant impact are discussed below:

Table 4: Customer and Community Services activities with significant impact

Activity name	RAG status	Activity status	Explanation
Raymond Street No19 – renew – building (ID 39606)	Red	In progress	Budget reallocated to complete the Windmill Pavilion project. Awaiting direction on the future use of the building.
Pt Chevalier library and community services review (ID 3946)	Red	In progress	The indicative business case for the approved options is nearing completion. The key findings to be workshopped with the local board in July 2024. The results of further work will be shared with the local board in quarter two of the financial year 2024/2025.
Lease at Murray Halberg Park for Marist Rugby League Football Club Incorporated (ID 3675)	Red	In progress	This item will be progressed after demolition of building and reinstatement of the land works are completed.
Lease at View Road Reserve for Ending Child Poverty and Trafficking (ID 3674)	Red	In progress	This item will be progressed after the renovation of the building is completed.
Morvern Reserve Concept Plan - progress delivery (ID 20586)	Grey	Deferred	Project on hold as budget has been deferred to financial year 2025/2026.
Aberfoyle Street - new - link pedestrian path (ID 36656)	Grey	Deferred	Project on hold as budget has been deferred to future financial years
Lease at 18-20 Huia Road, Point Chevalier (ID 3170)	Grey	Deferred	This site is part of a wider scope of work being undertaken by the Service Investment and Planning team. No lease will be progressed until the future use of the site has been assessed.
Lease at Anderson Park for Anderson Park Tennis Club Incorporated (ID 3665)	Amber	In progress	The group has surrendered their lease and the site is now vacant. Council staff will work together to present future options for this site.

Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme

19. In the Infrastructure and Environmental Services work programme, there are seven activities that were completed by the end of the year or will be by end of June 2024 (green).

Plans and Places work programme

20. In the Plans and Places work programme, there is one activity in progress:

· Integrated Area Plan for parts of Albert Eden and Puketāpapa (ID 1285): the area plan will be finalised on completion of the cultural landscape maps. Work on this is currently starting. The online document will be published once this is completed and endorsed by the delegated members of the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee.

Auckland Emergency Management work programme

21. In the Auckland Emergency Management (AEM) work programme, there is one activity with a green RAG status, that has been completed:

Community and business emergency response plans and resilience programme (ID 3952): this line has been added this financial year, after the flood and cyclone activity that impacted Auckland in early 2023. Staff have been working alongside the board on the Emergency Readiness and Response Plan (ER&R Plan). Two appointees from the local board have been involved in the ER&R Plan 'Working Group' along with AEM staff, local board services and the community broker. The plan will be finalised next financial year.

Deferred activities

22. The Lead Financial Advisors are identifying projects from the local board’s 2023/2024 Locally-driven Initiatives (LDI) operational budget which meet the criteria to be carried forward. These will be added to the 2024/2025 work programmes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. Receiving performance monitoring reports will not result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions.

24. The local board is invested in a number of sustainability projects, which aim to build awareness around individual carbon emissions, and changing behaviour at a local level. These include:

· Climate Action Programme Albert-Eden (ID 534): The programme supported four new initiatives, 32 community engagement stalls, 14 try an e-bike events and sent 10 email newsletters. The focus of the quarter was supporting the Albert-Eden and Puketāpapa Eco Festival from 6 April to 5 May.

· EcoNeighbourhoods Albert-Eden (ID 535): Eco- Neighbourhoods engaged with 120 households and held at least 42 events. Activity highlights include a climate action picnic in Ōwairaka and a wildflower workshop in Waterview. New groups include a Mt Eden group made up of people from the Afghanistan Hazara community who came to Aotearoa as refugees, focused on growing food, and a group based at Epsom Library focused on developing a community garden.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. When developing the work programmes council group impacts and views are presented to the local board.

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

Local impacts and local board views

26. This report informs the Albert-Eden Local Board of the performance for quarter four ending 30 June 2024 and the performance for the 2023/2024 financial year.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The local board’s work programme contains a number of projects which provide direct outcomes for Māori, such as:

· Local Māori Aspirations (ID 60): Initiatives funded in partnership with the Arts Broker programme included:

o He Mauri by Dr Rangihiroa Panoho exhibition and talk held in April-May 2024. This project was delivered over three weeks and attracted approximately 60 visitors over various opening times.

o Pa Harakeke by Cathy King in June 2024: Several workshops were held in May leading up to Matariki and pop-up raranga activities at local Albert-Eden markets and events over April and May. The exhibition continued at Gribblehirst Hub in late June.

o Matariki at Edendale School: included a dawn ceremony held on 27 June 2024, attended by over 400 friends and whanau of the school and local community. Several local business sponsors provided kai and supported the event.

o Matariki - A Community Celebration of Light: SPiCE delivered a community event at Sandringham Reserve on 29 June, celebrating under the stars lighting up trees in honour of Matariki. Live music, children’s activities and hot kai were provided following the lighting ceremony.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

28. This report is provided to enable the Albert-Eden Local Board to monitor the organisation’s progress and performance in delivering the 2023/2024 work programme. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Financial Performance

29. Auckland Council (Council) currently has a number of bonds quoted on the New Zealand, Singapore and Swiss Debt Markets (Quoted Bonds). As a result, the Council is subject to continuous disclosure obligations, which it must comply with under the listing rules of the NZX (Listing Rules), the listing rules of other exchanges and the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMCA).

30. These obligations restrict the release of annual financial reports and results until the Auckland Council Group results are released to the NZX – on or about 29 August 2024.

31. Due to these obligations the financial performance attachment to this report (Attachment B) is excluded from the public and is under confidential cover.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

32. Information about any significant risks and how they are being managed and/or mitigated is addressed in the ‘Overview of work programme performance’ section.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

33. Work programmes for 2024/2025 were approved at the board’s business meeting in June 2024.

34. Deferral of budgets of unfinished activities will be added into 2024/2025 work programmes by quarter one reporting.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board - 1 April to 30 June 2024 - Work Programme Update	109
b ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board - Operating Performance Financial Summary - Confidential

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Canela Ferrara - Local Board Advisor

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa Ward Councillor Julie Fairey’s July 2024 - Ward Councillor Report	145

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Albert-Eden Local Board Hōtaka Kaupapa/Governance Forward Work Programme Calendar - August 2024	159

[1] Note that the existing THAB Zone along the western margin (sub-precinct C) and the Mason Clinic site (sub-precinct A) are not part of the height plan.

[2] Note that parts of the RPS are proposed to be changed by Plan Change 80 (Well-Functioning Urban Environment, Resilience to the Effects of Climate Change and Qualifying Matters). A decision has been made on the plan change but is currently subject to appeal.

[3] The Do Minimum is the transport improvements that would be required to support the Carrington Residential development if there was no AT project, and includes three new signals on the corridor

[4] Auckland Transport. (Edition 2, June 2024). Practice Note 02: Use of raised devices on the AT Network

Chairperson	Kendyl Smith
Deputy Chairperson	Margi Watson
Members	José Fowler
	Julia Maskill
	Christina Robertson
	Liv Roe
	Rex Smith
	Jack Tan

Author	Michael Mendoza - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

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