Agenda of Howick Local Board - Thursday, 19 September 2024

1 Nau mai | Welcome

The Chair opened the meeting and welcomed everyone present.

2 Ngā Tamōtanga | Apologies

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

3 Te Whakapuaki i te Whai Pānga | Declaration of Interest

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

4 Te Whakaū i ngā Āmiki | Confirmation of Minutes

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday 15 August 2024, and the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday 22 Augsut 2024, as a true and correct record.

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 Howick 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 - Lyall Carter CEO - Young Life New Zealand Trust

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Lyall Carter – CEO of the Young Like New Zealand Trust will present to the Board a deputation on the present works that the trust does and take the time to thank the Howick Local Board for supporting their endeavors.

2. Young Life NZ empowers young people to thrive in every part of their lives through, school and community youth work in East Auckland.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Lyall Carter for his deputation and attendance.

8.2 Deputation - Aaron Martin - Chairperson East Skate Club Inc

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Aaron Martin Chairperson of the East Skate Club Inc will present to the Board a deputation on the topic of the Lloyd Elsmore Skatepark development.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Aaron Martin from the East Skate Club Inc for his deputation and attendance.

8.3 Deputation - Chris O’Loughlin – Resident of Bucklands Beach

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Chris O’Loughlin – Resident of Bucklands Beach will present to the Board a deputation on the Bucklands Beach safety improvements (Stage 1), noting the following concerns:

· Timing of public consultation

· Project delays and details surrounding HLB communicating of the proposal's changes and start date(s).

· Identification and consultation with key stake holders

· Justification for the project, specifically traffic and pedestrian survey data

· Impact on a local resident

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Chris O’Loughlin for his deputation and attendance.

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.”

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	19 September 2024, Howick Local Board: Chairperson's Report - Chair Light's Written Report

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Response to Ombudsman's recommendation to open workshops by default

File No.: CP2024/09937

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 Howick 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 XXX date.

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

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Landowner approval and variation to agreement to lease for Highbrook Watersports Centre Charitable Trust

File No.: CP2024/12859

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval for the Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust’s landowner approval application to construct a temporary storage shed at Highbrook Esplanade Reserve, 100R Highbrook Drive, East Tāmaki (Lot 523 DP 416793).

2. To vary the agreement to lease to the Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust for the construction of the proposed water sports centre to include the storage shed.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust (the Trust) are seeking landowner approval to install a 21m x 7m storage building within Highbrook Esplanade Reserve to be used for equipment storage.

4. In June 2023, the Howick Local Board provided landowner approval and an agreement to lease for the construction of the of the Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre (resolution HW/2023/112).

5. The storage shed is proposed to be located within the applicant’s community licence area. It is intended to vary the agreement to lease to include the temporary storage shed, with conditions that the building must be removed and the area reinstated following completion of the watersports centre. This is envisaged to be December 2029.

6. The facility itself will be owned by the Trust and will therefore have no direct financial implications for Howick Local Board.

7. The council-owned parcel affected at 100 Highbrook Drive, East Tamaki is Lot 523 DP 416793. Lot 523 is a classified Local Purpose (Esplanade) Reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.

8. Specialist council staff have assessed the application and are supportive of the installation of the shed on a temporary basis.

9. The proposal was discussed with Howick Local Board at their 1 August 2024 workshop. No objections to the proposal were raised, however board members wanted some clarification on matters.

10. Staff recommend that the Howick Local Board approve the landowner approval application for the proposed storage shed and varying the agreement to lease.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve landowner approval for the Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust to install a temporary shed a at Highbrook Esplanade Reserve, 100R Highbrook Drive, East Tāmaki and legally described as Lot 523 DP 416793.

b) whakaae / approve under the Reserves Act 1977 a variation to the agreement to lease to enable the installation of a storage shed as shown by the map in Attachment B, and its removal following the completion of the Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre.

Horopaki

Context

Proposal

11. The Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust (the Trust) is seeking landowner approval to install a storage shed within the area indicated in Figure 1, within Highbrook Esplanade Reserve.

12. The storage building proposed is a 21m x 7m (approximately 144m²) steel frame building which will be used for equipment storage onsite. The building will be 4m high at its highest point and slope down to 3.5m high next to the retaining wall that divides the space from the carpark. Plans for the storage building are shown in Figure 3 and 4, and in Attachment A.

13. The storage shed would facilitate activity by sports clubs and schools on site until the proposed regional watersports centre construction is completed (expected to be December 2029). The Trust have funding to install the building once landowner approval is received.

14. The proposed storage shed/building will be located within the Trust’s existing lease and licence area (as shown in Figure 4).

15. The existing containers onsite would be moved within the Trusts leased area (yellow area in Figure 4).

16. The trust has an existing agreement to lease for the construction of the Regional Watersports Centre. The agreement to lease will be varied to enable the installation of the storage shed, with a condition that the shed must be removed once the Watersports Centre is completed.

17. A plan showing the temporary storage area is shown in Figure 5 and Attachment B.

Figure 1. Proposed location of the storage shed (shown in grey) within Highbrook Esplanade Reserve.

Figure 2. Dimensions of the proposed storage building shown looking towards the retaining wall.

Figure 3. Side view of the proposed storage building with dimensions.

Background

1. The Auckland Regional Council sponsored the 2007 Auckland Regional Paddling and Rowing Facilities Study (ARPASS) to provide direction on where flat-water sporting facilities should be established within the Auckland Region. The site on the Tāmaki River was identified as one of three key sites that warranted the development of a regional facility.

2. In 2014 the site received resource consent for all three stages of the of the project:

· Stage 1: earthworks and construction of lower platform, access to platform, carpark works, boat ramp, and retaining walls

· Stage 2: construction of pontoons

· Stage 3: construction of the regional watersports centre building.

3. In 2015 the Trust’s predecessor, the Auckland Rowing Association, received landowner approval from the council and the Highbrook Park Trust, who previously managed the reserve, for stage 1 and 2 works to construct hardstands and provide water access. Stage 1 works were completed in 2015 and Stage 2 works were completed in 2016 and 2017.

4. In October 2018 Howick Local Board supported the temporary installation of a prefabricated ablution facility as the lack of facilities were resulting in the under utilisation of the existing hardstand facilities. The temporary ablution facilities will be removed following completion of the watersports centre.

5. The watersports centre building was assessed as being a Priority Level 1 project by the ‘Auckland Sport Sector: Facility Priorities Plan’ in 2018 as it showed the watersports centre was in strong alignment with the plan criteria.

6. In June 2023, Howick Local Board approved landowner approval and agreement to lease for the watersports centre building and a licence to occupy for the existing infrastructure from the stage 1 works (resolution HW/2023/112).

Figure 4. Plan showing the Trusts existing licence area (in blue) and lease areas (in yellow and green).

Figure 5. Plan showing the occupation areas while the shed is place (in yellow and green).

The Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Charitable Trust

7. The Highbrook Regional Watersports Centre Trust (the Trust) was established in December 2021 with trustees appointed by Auckland Rowing Association (ARA), Auckland Region Outrigger Canoe Association (AROCA), as represented by Tamaki based Waka-ama clubs including Manukau Outrigger Club, and mana whenua (Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki).

8. The purpose of the Trust is to represent the interests of two incorporated societies (ARA and AROCA) in establishing the watersports centre, and to oversee delivery of programmes that encourage the growth of outrigger canoeing, rowing, and other flatwater sports in Auckland.

9. The Trust is funded through fundraising, and once a building is established, the Trust’s operations will be predominantly funded via a user pays model.

10. The Trust is currently in discussions with a number of local businesses in the Highbrook Business Park to develop an annual sponsorship programme as an additional form of discretionary funding.

11. Several gaming trusts have also been involved in funding work to date, and the Trust’s officers/trustees have maintained good relationships with those organisations and are confident of retaining their ongoing support.

12. Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 sets out the requirements for community occupancy agreements. The Trust meets the requirements via its purpose and intent. As the Trust is new, council staff cannot comment on their financial stability or history of providing services. However, the Trust’s two major stakeholders are well established and have a long history of providing community outcomes for the area.

Highbrook Esplanade Reserve

13. The proposed location of the storage building is at 100R Highbrook Drive, East Tāmaki, which is legally described as Lot 523 DP 416793. It comprises 5.8297 hectares (more or less) and is contained in certificate of title 464675 and is owned in fee simple by Auckland Council. The reserve is currently held as classified local purpose (esplanade) reserve under the Reserves Act 1977.

14. Highbrook Esplanade Reserve extends around the perimeter of the businesses on Business Parade North (roughly to the north of Nassipour Way) and provides access and views of the Tāmaki River.

15. A gravel walking path extends around the western and northern portion of the reserve to 55 Waiouru Road.

16. The area around the proposed building is highly modified following the stage 1 works in 2015 (as shown by the photos in figures 6 and 7) with a carpark, driveway, retaining walls, hardstand, storage and pontoons.

17. The area is mainly used by the trust for watersports programmes but there is no restriction for other water sport groups for accessing the Tāmaki River using the pontoons.

18. An access gate prevents vehicles from entering the area. The gates were installed in 2022 by the Highbrook Development Trust to reduce gatherings occurring at night at the boat ramp area.

Figure 6. Photo of the area proposed for the storage building at Highbrook Esplanade Reserve

Figure 7. Photo of Highbrook Esplanade Reserve looking from the proposed building location towards the Tamaki Estuary.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Assessment of the application

19. Parks and Community Facilities aim to minimise the number of structures on parks and maximise the extent of open space areas. However, temporary storage facilities are a pragmatic and affordable solution for storage of equipment which facilitates activity and increased participation.

20. Negative impacts, such as loss of amenity, can be improved by the colour of the building being a painted a recessive colour to blend in with the surrounding environment.

21. The area proposed for the building is already highly modified with improvements from the Stage 1 works and will not decrease the amenity further.

22. The proposed use of the building for equipment is consistent with the existing use and esplanade reserve classification as the proposed building will enable and encourage public recreational use of the esplanade reserve. The proposal would not affect access to the site.

23. The building is to be located in the corner of the reserve directly against the retaining wall so it is unlikely to cause CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) issues as it will not create areas with low visibility and poor sightlines. Having a building on site will increase after-hours activities in the park, which is currently predominantly used during the day, allowing more passive surveillance.

Public notification and engagement

24. Public notification was not undertaken as part of the assessment of the storage shed as public notification was previously undertaken as part of the landowner approval process for the Watersports Centre from 15 March 2023 until 14 April 2023. No submissions or objections to the proposal were received.

25. Iwi engagement was also undertaken in 2023 at the same time as the public notification period.

Staff recommendation

26. Staff do not believe the installation of the storage shed will result in any loss of amenity, and the increase in activation of the area will improve the security of the area until the watersports centre is completed.

27. The applicant’s proposal is considered acceptable to Parks and Community Facilities as it aligns with the statutory classification of the land, the Howick Local Board Plan, and is supported by specialist council staff.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28. It is anticipated that installation of the temporary storage building will have a minor increase of greenhouse gas emissions. The storage building will enable the club to store equipment in one location for events and training meaning that there will be less transporting of equipment to and from the reserve.

29. To improve environmental outcomes and mitigate climate change impacts, the council advocates that the lease holder:

· use sustainable waste, energy and water efficiency systems

· use eco labelled products and services

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

30. Climate change has some potential to impact the proposed temporary building facility as the building is located in an area subject to coastal inundation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

31. The following council staff have been consulted on the proposal. No objections to the proposed marine recreation centre have been received:

· Parks and Places Specialist, Parks and Community Facilities

· Facilities Manager, Parks and Community Facilities

· Manager Area Operations, Parks and Community Facilities.

32. The Parks and Places Specialist did not object as long as boat users can still access and use the area.

33. Operations staff are supportive as the Trust are the main user of the area and do most of the maintenance currently.

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

35. Local boards have the allocated authority relating to local recreation and community facilities, including the use of local parks.

36. The Howick Local Board was contacted for feedback on the proposal 10 July 2024, who requested that a decision on the proposal be made at a board meeting.

37. A workshop was held with the Howick Local Board on 1 August 2024, where the board expressed support for the facility, but requested further information to be provided:

· the duration that the council is allowing the temporary building to be in place

· whether or not the variation of the lease needs to come before the board

· clarification of the footprint of the building

· access to the site

· security of the site.

38. The proposed storage building aligns with the Howick Local Board Plan 2023 outcome and objectives.

Outcome

Objectives

Our Community

Community facilities, spaces and activities enable people to participate, learn and grow.

Parks and open spaces support a wide variety of recreational activities.

39. The proposed storage shed will enable the trust to deliver an increase in water-based recreation opportunities for the local area as an interim measure until the watersports centre is completed.

40. As Highbrook Esplanade Reserve was managed by the Highbrook Park Trust, it was not included in the Manukau City Council Coastal and Riparian Reserves Management Plan 2009.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

41. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi which are outlined in the council’s key strategic planning documents; the Auckland Plan, the Long-Term Plan 2024-2034, the Unitary Plan, and local board plans.

42. Auckland Council has previously undertaken mana whenua feedback for the proposed regional Watersports Centre. The Trust has an ongoing relationship with Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki. Staff have also provided details of Ngāti Tamaoho to the Trust so they can engage with the group.

43. The trust has also undertaken mana whenua engagement in 2014 as part of the resourcing consenting process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

44. Ongoing maintenance of the building and surrounding area will be undertaken by the applicant.

45. Staff have consulted with the Financial Advisory department of the council. No concerns were raised regarding the financial implications for the temporary storage building.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

46. The following risks and mitigations have been considered:

Risk	Mitigation
Council left with responsibility for the storage shed.	The members of the trust are established organisations, and based on the Trust’s purpose, intent and membership, the risk is mitigated and the agreement to lease provides for the removal of the shed. The shed will be built as a temporary structure and its removal will not be expensive.
Poor management of storage shed whilst funding is being raised for the watersports centre.	The existing agreement to lease provides for certain conditions to be met prior to the completion of the centre. The agreement has maintenance obligations that the trust must fulfil.
Public safety during the storage sheds installation.	During the construction access to the pontoons will be restricted for public safety. The installation is a short duration and will not inconvenience the public for a longer period of time.
Storage shed not removed because of delays to the construction of the watersports centre	The agreement to lease has deadlines that the trust must meet in the development of the watersports centre.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47. If the Howick Local Board grants landowner approval to the Trust for the temporary storage building, staff will formalise the approvals with the relevant approval documents.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Temporary storage building concept plans
b ⇨	Plan showing the temporary occupation area

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Glenn Riddell - Senior Land Use Advisor

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Mangemangeroa Reserve land owner approval application from the Friends of Mangemangeroa

File No.: CP2024/13174

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve the retrospective land owner approval application from the Friends of Mangemangeroa Reserve for a small water tank and planter units on Mangemangeroa Reserve.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Friends of Mangemangeroa (FOM) are seeking retrospective land owner approval for a small water tank and planter units that are currently located on Mangemangeroa Reserve. The structures have been located on the reserve since December 2023 however have never had approval from council as land owner. A container is also located at the site and received land owner approval from the Howick Local Board in 2016.

3. The structures were previously located within the stockyards that were at the site however the stockyards have now been completely removed.

4. The proposal aligns with the Howick Local Board Plan 2023, in particular the objective ‘People actively contribute to their community’ as the proposal will support and empower the FOM to protect and maintain the Mangemangeroa Reserve in conjunction with council.

5. Staff support the structures remaining at the site on a temporary basis only until direction has been identified in relation to the future development of Mangemangeroa Reserve. Staff recommend a two-year initial approval period to accommodate future development plans, which can be extended at council’s discretion.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) approve the retrospective landowner approval application from the Friends of Mangemangeroa for a small water tank and planter units located on Mangemangeroa Reserve.

Horopaki

Context

6. Mangemangeroa Reserve comprises 21.9938 hectares and is described as Allotment 74 Parish of Pakuranga and Section 1 SO 447617 (Record of Title 568618). It is currently held in fee simple by Auckland Council under the Local Government Act 2002.

7. As described on their website, the “Friends of Mangemangeroa are an environmentally minded group who work with council to maintain and restore the coastal forest along the Mangemangeroa Estuary. Restoration work has seen the bush edge extended through pioneer species planting and more recently the growing of eco-sourced seedlings for inplanting of canopy trees”.

8. The Friends of Mangemangeroa (FOM) have advised that since 2020 they have provided plants worth an estimated $62,349 and the propagation units have been used to germinate and raise 13,869 plants, of which have been planted on Mangemangeroa Reserve by the working parties organised by the FOM.

9. The FOM are seeking retrospective approval for a small water tank (located behind container in Figures 2 and 3 below) and planter units (as shown in Figure 3) located on Mangemangeroa Reserve. The structures have been located at the site since December 2023 however have never had approval from council as land owner (the FOM are now seeking this approval) due to some private residences and Somerville School no longer being available for propagation.

10. The small water tank is fed by the main council water tanks at the site and is used by the FOM to enable gravity fed water for the seedlings on a daily basis. The planter units are essential for native bush restoration undertaken by the FOM and assist with the eco-sourcing of seeds from the reserve, growing plants and planting.

11. The structures were previously located within the stockyards (also visible within the photo) that were at the reserve however these have now been completely removed, following approval from council.

12. The FOM are seeking to keep the water tank in the same location, however the planter units will be moved to the other side of the container if approval is forthcoming. The structures are required to be within close proximity to each other to ensure integration of activities on the site.

Figure 1: Mangemangeroa Reserve

Figure 2: Subject area on Mangemangeroa Reserve

Figure 3: FOM structures

13. The FOM will be responsible for all ongoing maintenance of the structures and any costs associated with their removal should this be required.

14. The applicant has supplied a letter of support from Pest Free Howick and council’s sustainable schools advisor in relation to the application.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. The following Auckland Council specialists have reviewed and have no objection to the proposal on the basis that the structures remain at the site on a temporary basis only until direction has been identified in relation to the future development of Mangemangeroa Reserve:

· Facilities Manager, Parks & Community Facilities,

· Land Use Manager, Parks & Community Facilities,

· Manager Area Operations, Parks & Community Facilities,

· Parks & Places Specialist, Parks & Community Facilities.

16. The structures will not impact public access to Mangemangeroa Reserve as they are already located on the site and only take up a small portion of the reserve comparable to its overall size.

17. Staff therefore recommend that the Howick Local Board approve the proposal.

Alternative options

18. The applicant has advised that there are no alternative locations available for the structures due to previous other locations including private residences and Somerville School no longer being available for use. The structures also need to be co-located due to ensure the integration of activities at the reserve.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. In 2020 Auckland Council adopted Auckland’s climate plan, Te Tāruke ā-Tāwhiri. Local boards have an important role to play in leading and supporting Auckland’s response to the climate emergency, including supporting regional climate plan initiatives, integrating climate awareness into all decisions, including community investment.

20. The Howick Local Board in its local board plan states it is committed to supporting pest free programmes and working with communities to adopt and restore sensitive ecological areas.

21. The proposal will have a positive impact on climate change as the planter units and water tank will directly assist with the restoration of biodiversity within the Mangemangeroa Reserve.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

22. The application and its effects have been assessed by a number of specialists within council. No other council groups are considered to be affected by the proposal beyond those consulted with.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. Local boards have the allocated authority relating to local recreation and community facilities, including the use of local parks, and associated leasing matters.

24. The proposal aligns with the Howick Local Board Plan 2023, in particular the objectives ‘People actively contribute to their community’ as the proposal will support and empower the FOM to protect and maintain the Mangemangeroa Reserve in conjunction with council.

25. The Howick Local Board were contacted by staff on 7 August 2024 for their feedback on the proposal. A response was received on 9 August 2024 requested that a decision be made by the Howick Local Board at a business meeting.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

27. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, Whiria Te Muka Tangata – Māori Responsiveness Framework, Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau – the Māori Outcomes Performance Measurement Framework.

28. There are no known archaeological sites or sites of significance to Māori, identified within the locality of the FOM structures on Mangemangeroa Reserve. Furthermore, no earthworks or groundn-breaking is proposed. Nevertheless, a condition of any landowner approval granted will be that the applicant complies with all accidental discovery protocols.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. There are no financial implications for council as the FOM will be responsible for all ongoing maintenance of the structures and any costs associated with their removal should this be required.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

Upon approval

30. If the Howick Local Board approve this application for landowner approval, the FOM will be issued with a land owner approval that will set out a number conditions, including that the approval is for a two-year initial approval period to accommodate council’s potential future development plans. Any approval granted can be extended at council’s discretion.

Upon decline:

31. If the local board declines the proposal, the FOM will be required to move the small water tank and planter units off Mangemangeroa Reserve. The risk associated with this is that the FOM may not be able to operate as they currently have due to a lack of facilities/structures available to support their activities.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The Howick Local Board may resolve to approve or decline the application for landowner approval. Staff will inform the applicant of the outcome and draft a landowner approval agreement, if required.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Darren Cunningham - Land Use Manager

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Approval for new road names at Highbrook Business Park, East Tamaki

File No.: CP2024/13028

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Howick Local Board to name two roads created by development within the Highbrook Business Park.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. The guidelines state that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider /developer shall be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

3. The developer and applicant, Highbrook Development Limited has proposed the names presented below for consideration by the local board.

4. The proposed road name options have been assessed against the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines and the Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245. The technical matters required by those documents are considered to have been generally met and the proposed names are not duplicated elsewhere in the region or in close proximity. Mana whenua have been consulted in the manner required by the Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines.

5. The proposed names for the new roads at Highbrook Business Park are:

Applicant’s Preference

Alternatives

Road 1

Tūhana Lane

Te Kauanga Lane

Wakawaka Lane

Road 2

Sir Noel Robinson Place

Robinson Place

Noel Robinson Place

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) approve the following names for two new roads created by way of development undertaken by Highbrook Development Limited at the Highbrook Business Park, East Tamaki, in accordance with section 319(1)(j) of the Local Government Act 1974 (Road naming reference RDN90117195, resource consent reference RC53064).

i. Tūhana Lane (Road 1)

ii. Robinson Place (Road 2)

Horopaki

Context

6. Roads within the Highbrook Business Park were created by way of resource consents (including resource consent RC53064), some years ago. The roads are already constructed and have been named by the developer, but there is no record of any names formally approved within the development. As part of this application, Highbrook Development Limited is seeking approval to formally name two of the roads within the Highbrook Business Park. A separate application will be submitted for the remaining roads within the Highbrook Business Park.

7. The site and location plan of the development and existing roads can be found in Attachment A.

8. In accordance with Australian & New Zealand Standard, Rural and Urban Addressing, AS NZS 4819:2011 and the Guidelines for Addressing in-fill Developments 2019 – LINZ OP G 01245 (the standards), any road including private ways, COALs, and right of ways, that serve more than five lots generally require a new road name in order to ensure safe, logical and efficient street numbering.

9. Neither road serves five or more lots. However, the applicant would like to name these roads. The roads to be named are also shown in Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. The Auckland Council Road Naming Guidelines (the guidelines) set out the requirements and criteria of the council for proposed road names. These requirements and criteria have been applied in this situation to ensure consistency of road naming across the Auckland Region. The guidelines allow that where a new road needs to be named as a result of a subdivision or development, the subdivider/developer shall be given the opportunity to suggest their preferred new road name/s for the local board’s approval.

11. The guidelines provide for road names to reflect one of the following local themes with the use of Māori names being actively encouraged:

· a historical, cultural, or ancestral linkage to an area; or

· a particular landscape, environmental or biodiversity theme or feature; or

· an existing (or introduced) thematic identity in the area.

12. Theme: The names proposed are either to commemorate people of significance to the local area and to reflect the cultural and ancestral link that Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki has with the area.

Road Number	Proposed name	Meaning (as described by applicant)
Road 1	Tūhana Lane (applicant’s preference)	Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki suggested this name. The name pays homage to the awa, but linking the similarity of the poles that the horses jump, tūhana is the name for a river-crossing pole - a pole held breast high for linking people when crossing a river where the strongest people were positioned at each end of the pole, to prevent the smaller or weaker members of the party from being washed off their feet.
	Te Kauanga Lane (alternative)	Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki suggested this name. The name refers to a crossing place – “Te kauanga o te awa”, a river crossing.
	Wakawaka Lane (alternative)	Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki suggested this name. The name refers to division of a harvesting area which may be on land, river or sea.
Road 2	Sir Noel Robinson Place (applicant’s preference)	In commemoration of Sir Noel Robinson.
	Robinson Place (alternative)	In commemoration of Sir Noel Robinson.
	Noel Robinson Place (alternative)	In commemoration of Sir Noel Robinson.

13. Assessment: All the name options listed in the table above have been assessed by the council’s Subdivision Specialist team to ensure that they meet both the guidelines and the standards regarding road naming. The technical standards are considered to have been generally met except for Principle 3.4 of the guidelines. Principle 3.4 of the guidelines states that the names of people who are still alive should be avoided, as community attitudes and opinions can change over time. While in this case, Sir Noel Robinson is still alive, the applicant would like to propose a name after Sir Noel Robinson to acknowledge the history of Highbrook as Ra Ora horse stud, the personal links Sir Noel Robinson holds with the estate, and his contribution to the community. To that effect the applicant has provided a detailed explanation and Sir Noel Robinson’s biography directly below:

14. Sir Noel is the nephew of Sir Woolf and Lady Joyce Fisher. He founded Robinson Industries in 1970 and was managing director and chairman until his retirement in 1999. He is also chairman of Sir Woolf Fisher Charitable Trust, the Counties Manukau Pacific Trust and several private companies. He is a trustee of John Walker Field of Dreams. He was appointed to a Knighthood in 2006 for services to business and the community.

15. The history of Highbrook Business Park is deeply entwined with the Fisher family. Originally owned by Sir Woolf and Lady Joyce Fisher the estate had a successful history as one of the country’s leading horse studs. As the family home of New Zealand’s leading industrialist, it hosted visiting dignitaries, international business leaders and even the members of the royal family. The Fisher Family Trust, headed by Sir Noel Robinson (nephew of Sir Woolf), began to explore the development potential of the Ra Ora property following the death of Sir Woolf in 1975. The vision to create a world-class business park at Highbrook was led by Sir Noel and recognised the close family association with New Zealand industry. Sir Noel was instrumental in the process to rezone the estate and secure the necessary infrastructure to facilitate its development. It was a lengthy process that culminated in the creation of the new Highbrook interchange, with a bridge linking the estate directly with SH1, being completed in 2006. It was a project that required the Fisher Family Trust to invest with Council in a public/private partnership that committed $50 million into the construction of that infrastructure. Commercial development began in earnest in the early 2000’s adhering to a masterplan designed by a leading global landscape architect retained by the Fisher Family Trust. With approximately one third of the original property set aside as park land it is a lasting community legacy that’s complemented by high quality commercial development.

16. In this instance and for clarity, the reporting officer has recommended the name ‘Robinson Place’ rather than the applicant’s preferred name, however it is for the local board to decide upon the suitability of the names within the local context and in accordance with the delegation.

17. Confirmation: Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) has confirmed that all of the proposed names are acceptable for use at this location.

18. Road Type: ‘Place’ and ‘Lane’ are acceptable road types for the new roads, suiting the form and layout of the roads.

19. Consultation: The applicant has obtained consent from Sir Noel Robinson. Mana whenua were consulted in line with the processes and requirements described in the guidelines. Additional commentary is provided in the Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori section that follows.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The naming of roads has no effect on climate change. Relevant environmental issues have been considered under the provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 and the associated approved resource consent for the development.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The decision sought for this report has no identified impacts on other parts of the Council group. The views of council controlled organisations were not required for the preparation of the report’s advice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. The decision sought for this report does not trigger any significant policy and is not considered to have any immediate local impact beyond those outlined in this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

23. To aid local board decision making, the guidelines include an objective of recognising cultural and ancestral linkages to areas of land through engagement with mana whenua, particularly through the resource consent approval process, and the allocation of road names where appropriate. The guidelines identify the process that enables mana whenua the opportunity to provide feedback on all road naming applications and in this instance, the process has been adhered to.

24. On 23 July 2024, mana whenua were contacted by council on behalf of the applicant, through the Resource Consent department’s central facilitation process, as set out in the guidelines. Representatives of the following groups with an interest in the general area were contacted:

· Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki

· Te Kawerau ā Maki

· Ngāti Tamaoho

· Te Ākitai Waiohua

· Te Ahiwaru Waiohua

· Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua

· Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust

· Ngāti Maru

· Ngāti Tamaterā

· Waikato-Tainui

· Ngāti Whanaunga

· Te Patukirikiri

25. By the close of the consultation period (10 working days), no responses, comments, or feedback were received. While no other iwi have given feedback it is noted that the applicant consulted closely with Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki to source a number of those Te Reo Māori names that have been proposed, with one of those names being preferred for Road 1.

26. This site is not listed as a site of significance to mana whenua.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. The road naming process does not raise any financial implications for the Council.

28. The applicant has responsibility for ensuring that appropriate signage will be installed accordingly once approval is obtained for the new road names.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

29. There are no significant risks to Council as road naming is a routine part of the subdivision development process, with consultation being a key component of the process.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

30. Approved road names are notified to LINZ which records them on its New Zealand wide land information database. LINZ provides all updated information to other users, including emergency services.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Report Attachment A Location and Site Plan

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Amy Cao - Subdivision Advisor

Authorisers

David Snowdon - Team Leader Subdivision

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Barry Curtis Park - renewal of play facilities

File No.: CP2024/12959

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval of the proposed concept design for the renewal of the playground at Barry Curtis Park (163 Chapel Road, Flat Bush) and to progress the project to detailed design and construction.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Staff identified the renewal of the Barry Curtis Park playground as an asset renewal project. The Howick Local Board requested that staff explore the possibility of including accessible and inclusive play elements during the renewal process to enhance play opportunities for all children.

3. The local board has allocated $1,378,174 of ABS: Capex – Local Renewal funding and $620,000 Locally Driven Initiatives (LDI) Capex funding towards the renewal of play facilities at Barry Curtis Park to meet the service requirements as identified in the Barry Curtis Park Masterplan. The local board approved the project as part of their 2024/2025 Customer and Community Services work programme on 27 June 2024 (resolution HW/2024/76).

4. The project supports the focus areas and key aspects of the Howick Local Board Plan 2023.

5. A concept design has been developed, incorporating feedback from the community, iwi, accessibility representatives and the local board.

6. The project team is working closely with Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki to capture and deliver on their aspirations, values and priorities for Barry Curtis Park including the playground.

7. Staff now seek approval for the proposed concept design before progressing the project to detailed design, consenting and construction.

8. Physical works to undertake the construction of the proposed design is expected to commence in early 2025.

9. The local board will receive project progress updates as part of the regular monthly Parks and Community Facilities updates and through quarterly status reports.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve the concept design for the playground at Barry Curtis Park located at 163 Chapel Road, Flat Bush as per Attachment A of the agenda report and request staff to progress the project to detailed design and construction.

Horopaki

Context

10. The Barry Curtis Park playground needs renovation and improvement to serve a large and growing geographic area.

11. The existing playground at Barry Curtis Park offers limited play opportunities, primarily catering to young children.

12. Due to population growth in the Flat Bush-Ormiston area, the local board’s Howick Playground Analysis (May 2021) recommends that the Barry Curtis Park playground be developed as a destination playground. Figure 1 shows a location plan of Barry Curtis Park playground.

13. The Howick Playground Analysis findings identified wide-ranging provision gaps in wheeled, accessible, youth and specialist play facilities across the 70 playgrounds within the Howick Local Board area. There is also a low provision of;

(a) sheltered gathering spaces,

(b) accessible pathway networks,

(d) parents with mobility needs, and

(e) people on the disability spectrum.

14. To improve the network in the short term and to provide valuable play facilities for a wide range of age groups, the Howick Playground Analysis recommended that the board prioritise investment in playgrounds where there is already a range of supporting amenities such as;

· toilets

· car parking

· pathway networks

· located on bus routes and walking and cycling connections.

15. In the Howick Playground Analysis, the playground in Barry Curtis Park was identified as a high development priority, as it can fill identified age groups and play provision network gaps and provide much-needed local and holistic playground network improvements.

Figure 1: Location plan of Barry Curtis Park playground

16. As a part of the Howick Local Board’s 2021/2022 Customer and Community Services Work Programme, the local board approved a project to renew the playground at Barry Curtis Park. The operational maintenance playground inspection report noted that the playground at Barry Curtis Park is in poor condition, with mostly old equipment with a high criticality of renewal.

17. Staff presented two options for the playground renewal:

a) a like-for-like renewal of existing play values

b) an upgrade to accessible, inclusive play opportunities with shade.

18. The second option required additional locally driven initiatives (LDI) funding, as it was considered an enhancement to the current service. However, the board recognised the benefits of this approach, as it would allow for more play opportunities to be provided to a wider range of the community.

19. The addition of accessible and inclusive play elements ensures that all children feel included in the play space. This social interaction promotes understanding and acceptance of children with diverse abilities.

20. The concept design and assessment, which considered constraints, risks, estimated costs, and the impact on LDI funding, was presented and discussed with the local board at a workshop on 24 August 2023.

21. Local board members supported the design in principle but requested council staff to investigate and provide options for improved fencing around the playground.

22. At a workshop on 5 October 2023, the local board members were presented with fencing options and their associated costs. While they supported a fully fenced playground, they requested additional information on this option.

23. At a workshop on 8 February 2024, the project manager and other specialists provided further advice regarding the advantages and disadvantages of a fully fenced playground.

24. It was acknowledged that some families can only visit fenced playgrounds because their children run off, cannot hear, or become too involved in play and move away from their parents or carers. However, in the case of Barry Curtis Park, there are several disadvantages of fencing the playground:

a) Reduced accessibility

A fully fenced playground with gates can restrict the park’s accessibility to all users and visitors. Gates can be difficult to manoeuvre around, particularly for those in a wheelchair or using mobility aids. As the gate’s latch needs to be out of a child’s reach, it can be difficult for those in a wheelchair or people with reduced motor skills to open.

b) Impact on inclusivity and safety of playground area

Studies have shown that less parental supervision combined with limited opportunities to escape fenced playground areas can result in increased chances of bullying occurring. An inclusive destination playground, creating a safe and welcoming environment for all users is critical.

c) Restricted access to wider park

Fences separate children from interacting with other spaces outside the playground, thus limiting the opportunity for imaginative free play and restricting their ability to assess risk.

25. As a destination playground, Barry Curtis Park will attract users of all ages. In many instances, fencing is for toddlers and young children, who are at an age that should always require adult supervision. The fencing will not prevent most children from escaping or accessing another area if they choose to, as many would be able to climb the fence.

26. Staff recommended alternative measures that could be undertaken to prevent child and vehicle conflict, including:

· speed humps and coloured surfacing to slow vehicles down in the carpark

· realigning the path at the carpark

· partial fencing with decorative panels and sections of pool fencing (without gates) between the playground, road and car parks

· adding a densely planted buffer in areas without fencing.

27. Based on staff recommendations, the local board decided to proceed with partial fencing of the playground, incorporating additional measures to prevent conflicts between children and vehicles.

28. Local board members wanted to ensure the option of full fencing remained available for future consideration.

29. The fencing decision would be revisited once the playground and the renewal of the pavilion and toilet projects were completed. Staff advised that full fencing could be added to the board's future work programme if desired by local board members and the community.

30. The concept design was updated to reflect the feedback received from the local board.

31. As a part of the Howick Local Board’s 2024/2025 Customer and Community Services work programme (resolution HW/2024/96), the local board approved the project to develop the playground at Barry Curtis Park with increased levels of service and play value. The local board allocated $1,378,174 of renewal capex funding and $620,000 of LDI funding towards this project.

Links to relevant local and regional strategies, policies and plans

32. The renewal and upgrade of the Barry Curtis Park playground will deliver on the following Auckland Plan Outcomes:

· Belonging and participation

· Māori identity and well-being

· Home and Places and environment

· Cultural heritage.

33. The playground renewal at Barry Curtis Park meets objectives from the Howick Open Space Network Plan 2021 by increasing the presence of more physically challenging play equipment for older children and young teens.

34. The playground renewal includes plans to increase tree planting to mitigate wind channelling through the park. This aligns with the Howick Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2021, which aims to increase tree canopy coverage on public land by 3%.

35. The Howick Playground Analysis gives a high priority rating to develop a destination playground to address population growth in Flat Bush and Ormiston and to service its large geographic area. The enhancement should include improvements in specialised play with water.

36. Baseline improvements include:

· climbing

· jumping

· sliding

· spinning with overhead bars

· sheltered gathering space.

37. The incorporation of accessible and inclusive play opportunities at Barry Curtis Park will increase the usability of the space meeting the needs of our tamariki.

38. The accessible, inclusive, and sensory-rich environment will instil a sense of independence and confidence in children.

39. An inclusive playground can also encourage friendships between different groups of children, which promotes awareness and acceptance of diversity.

40. The inclusion of demountable built shade in addition to trees at Barry Curtis Park playground and a permanent built shelter for picnics with seating also meets objectives outlined in the Howick Local Board Shade/Shelter Provision Assessment 2023.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Consultation / Engagement

41. Consultation with the local community took place in April 2023 through:

· the Auckland Council Have Your Say webpage

· libraries

· the Howick Local Board Facebook page

· via email

· site observations

42. In addition to remote engagement, a highly successful community drop-in event was held on 29 April 2023, at the Barry Curtis Park playground. Several local board members also attended this session.

43. A summary of the consultation feedback is attached to the report as Attachment A.

Themes from engagement

44. The themes from the engagement with the community are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1: Have Your Say responses

‘AK Have Your Say’ questionnaire – April – May 2023
· 264 submissions were received through the online consultation
· 89 hard copy submissions were received during the community drop-in event on 29 April 2023
· 57.3% of respondents visited the playground at least once a week
· Most of the trips to the playground were by car
· Just over half of the respondents spent an average of 30 to 60 minutes at the playground per visit
Feedback	Response
The play equipment visitors spent the most time on:	1. Swings 2. The rope climbing structure 3. Climbing tower and slides (young children)
Top three types of play equipment respondents would like to see:	1. Sliding 2. Swinging 3. Climbing
The top three specialised play equipment respondents would like to see:	1. Water play 2. Flying fox 3. Learn-to-ride track
Respondents said they would like to see improvements in:	· Shade provision · Seating and picnic tables · Water play · Accessibility for park visitors of all age groups · Ease of access between pathways and play equipment · Accessible playground surfaces · Reduced rough and steep pathways · Besides the inclusion of swings and slides, the community favoured: o jumping activities, o nature play/balance o creative play.

45. Detailed stakeholder feedback analysis is outlined in Attachment A.

Proposed concept design

46. The proposed playground design has been developed to ensure tamariki with different levels of ability have play options available.

The addition of shrub planting creates a natural buffer between the playground, the car park, and Stancombe Road, softening the boundary. A fence is strategically placed within the planting to partially enclose the playground, providing a more secure space. Refer to Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Proposed fencing and shade sails locations

A map of a park

Description automatically generated

47. The addition of native and specimen trees will provide shade, act as a wind buffer, and enhance the amenity of the space. This planting will also support exploration and nature play.

48. Shade sail structures have been included over the junior play equipment, picnic tables, and water play area, providing shade in areas where children are likely to spend extended periods of time. Refer to Figure 2 above.

Play activities.

49. The overall design aims to enhance play opportunities within the local area for young children, making the park more enjoyable for the whole whanau

50. The playground concept design includes a variety of play elements, with some elements fitting into multiple categories. Refer to Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: Proposed play elements and equipment

Accessibility

51. The proposed playground design has been developed to provide accessible play options for tamariki to ensure children of all abilities have play options available.

52. The site features accessible ramps from the car park, benefiting those who use walking aids or wheelchairs. Several accessible parking spaces are located near the main play area entrance.

53. Wet pour synthetic rubber, a smooth safety surface, has been proposed for easy access to the play equipment.

54. The play equipment selected for Barry Curtis Park has accessible or inclusive features. Examples of this include an inground trampoline suitable for wheelchairs, and a ramp to provide easy access to the slide.

55. The water play area is easily accessible, with wheelchair users able to pump water into the meandering play streams. The water play is located under the shade sail.

56. The picnic tables will be designed to be accessible, allowing those in wheelchairs to be included at the table with their whanau.

57. Backs and armrests are included on seating to assist older people, and those with injuries can access comfortable resting places within the play space.

58. Staff recommend that the concept plan be approved to proceed with equipment ordering, tendering, and construction.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

a) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and

b) to prepare the region for the adverse impacts of climate change.

60. It is anticipated that there will be an increase in carbon emissions from construction, including contractor emissions. Staff will seek to minimise carbon and contractor emissions as much as possible when delivering the project.

61. Maximising the upcycling and recycling of existing materials, in accordance with the waste management hierarchy of prevention, reduction, and recycling, will be prioritised to minimise environmental impact.

62. Greenhouse gas emissions will be mitigated by sourcing low-carbon materials locally and using products with environmental declarations to reduce embodied carbon.

63. The renewal will enhance the surrounding natural environment, with maintenance and ecological restoration work being undertaken on the existing stormwater swales.

64. The concept design has incorporated the use of passive principles and natural infrastructure including new trees to provide some shade for areas of the play space.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

65. Council staff from the Parks and Community Facilities department, including the facilities manager, and parks and places specialist, and Healthy Waters teams, support the renewal as it will enhance the park's quality.

66. The project will significantly improve play opportunities for younger children and children with accessibility requirements in the surrounding community. The play space will also cater to youth.

67. Collaboration with staff will be ongoing to ensure that the development of the play space is integrated appropriately into the operational maintenance and asset management systems once completed.

68. While the increased size of the play space will require more day-to-day maintenance, the selected elements are designed for durability and robustness.

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

Local impacts and local board views

69. Barry Curtis Park is well-used by residents and visitors to the neighbourhood. Ormiston Town Centre and several schools are also located close to the park.

70. The project will benefit the community by providing improved play opportunities for children ages zero to 12 within the local area. The playground is conveniently located within walking distance of nearby neighbourhoods and offers ample parking for those arriving by car.

71. The revised concept design, incorporating changes previously requested by the local board, and feedback received from stakeholders, was presented to the local board at a workshop on 8 February 2024. The local board indicated support for the concept design.

72. The project aligns with and supports the Howick Local Board Plan 2023:

· Our People – Build and maintain mutually beneficial relationships with Māori, and the key initiative ‘Strengthen relationships with Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki to identify joint aspirations and priorities, and acknowledge them as kaitiaki of our area’

· Our Environment - Our large natural areas are enhanced and protected, and the key initiative ‘Implement the Howick Urban Ngahere Action Plan 2021 to increase tree canopy coverage on public land by 3%’

· Our Community - Parks and open spaces support a wide variety of recreational activities, and the key initiative ‘Provide facilities and activities across our parks network to suit people of diverse demographics and abilities’.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

73. Auckland Council is committed to meeting its responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its statutory obligations and relationship commitments to Māori. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents, the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan (operative in part), Whiria Te Muka Tangata Māori Responsiveness Framework and local board plans.

74. Parks and reserves are taonga and hold significant cultural importance for mana whenua. Developing a network of inclusive parks that cater to all ages and abilities will positively contribute to the health and well-being of both mana whenua and the wider community by increasing recreational opportunities.

75. Engagement with mana whenua on this project has been undertaken as part of the consultation process. Feedback from Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki was received supporting the project in principle, and a draft Kōrero document captures Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki’s values and aspirations for the playground and the wider Barry Curtis Park. Several of these aspirations will be delivered as part of the playground upgrade works and the document will also be utilised for future projects in the park.

76. Further opportunities to input on the project will be provided through the detailed design phase and associated consultation process.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

77. The local board has approved a total budget of $1,998,174 for this project over the following financial years:

Table 2: Approved budget allocation for the project

Budget source	FY21/22	FY22/23	FY23/24	FY24/25	Total ($)
ABS: Local Renewals	$5,014	$49,875	$232,125	$1,091,161	$1,378,174
Locally driven initiatives (LDI)	0	0	0	$620,000	$620,000
Total allocated budget	$5,014	$49,875	$232,125	$1,711,161	$1,998,174

78. The estimated cost for physical works, including play equipment, is $1,750,000. The total project cost is estimated to be $1,995,000, which includes professional services and staff time. This is achievable within the currently allocated budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

79. The following risks and mitigations have been considered in Table 2:

Table 3: Risks and mitigations for the proposed concept design option

Risks identified	Mitigation
Timeframe
Consenting	· Consent is required, and the application process may impact the construction timeline. Our experienced staff will participate in pre-application meetings with the regulatory team to expedite the process and meet deadlines. · There is a risk of community opposition to the project, which could delay the timeline and increase costs during the resource consent and engagement phases. Staff will address any such concerns, following guidance from our department planners and consulting with the board as needed.
Health & Safety
The public being exposed to unsafe conditions during the construction phase	· The site will be fully fenced off from the public, with signage alerting people to ongoing construction.
Construction
Poor weather during construction may hold up delivery	· Construction methodology and programme to allow for wet weather.
Damage to existing paths due to construction works	· Ground protection mats will be used to minimise the impact of machinery on the path. If damage were to occur, this would have to be remedied at a cost to the contractor. A small contingency has also been factored into the budget to account for this.

Contamination
Possible risk of ground contamination	· Historical records indicate that the playground site is free of contaminants. However, if any contaminants are discovered during construction, it could potentially delay the project.
Other
Dependencies on any other project / department	· The adjacent Wetland Building and restrooms are scheduled for renovation. While the exact construction timeline remains uncertain, it may overlap with the playground project. Since both projects are being undertaken by the same team, staff are working together to minimise disruptions to both
Reputational	· Public expectations can be heightened based on the feedback they may have provided during the consultation process. If the final plans do not align with these expectations, it may lead to community disappointment and decreased participation in future projects. Once this report is approved, the project team can follow up with the community and user groups who participated in the consultation.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

80. Table 3 outlines the anticipated next steps and estimated delivery timelines for the project. These timeframes assume the successful and timely completion of each project step. Unforeseen delays in procuring a construction partner and obtaining playground equipment could potentially delay the project beyond the estimated timeframe.

Table 3: Project phasing and timelines

Project phase	Estimated completion timeframe
Resource consent application	Completed
Detailed design Once the local board approves the concept design, we can proceed with developing the detailed design. This phase will include further collaboration with iwi.	November 2024
Building consent application	November 2024
Procure physical works contractor/build partner The tender will be submitted to a suitable contractor as per the procurement guidelines.	January 2025
Physical works An accurate commencement date and the duration of the physical works are not known at this time and will be confirmed at a later stage but are envisaged between the dates specified.	February – June 2025

81. The local board will receive project progress updates as part of the regular monthly Parks and Community Facilities updates and through quarterly status reports.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Barry Curtis Park play report

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Vandna Kirmani - Programme Manager (FF Contracts)

Authorisers

Julie Pickering - Head of Area Operations

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Howick Local Board Annual Report 2023/2024

File No.: CP2024/13133

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board adoption of the 2023/2024 Annual Report for the Howick Local Board, prior to it being adopted by the Governing Body on 26 September 2024.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Auckland Council Annual Report 2023/2024 is being prepared and needs to be adopted by the Governing Body by 26 September 2024. As part of the overall report package, individual reports for each local board are prepared.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whai / adopt the draft 2023/2024 Howick Local Board Annual Report as set out in Attachment A to the agenda report.

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that any proposed changes after the adoption will be clearly communicated and agreed with the chairperson before the report is submitted for adoption by the Governing Body on 26 September 2024.

Horopaki

Context

3. In accordance with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 and the Local Government Act 2002, each local board is required to monitor and report on the implementation of its Local Board Agreement. This includes reporting on the performance measures for local activities and the overall funding impact statement for the local board.

4. In addition to the compliance purpose, local board annual reports are an opportunity to tell the wider performance story with a strong local flavour, including how the local board is working towards the outcomes of their local board plan.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

5. The annual report contains the following sections:

Section	Description
Mihi	The mihi is an introduction specific to each local board area and is presented in Te Reo Māori and English.
About this report	An overview of what is covered in this document.
Message from the chairperson	An overall message introducing the report, highlighting achievements and challenges, including both financial and non-financial performance.
Local board members	A group photo of the local board members.
Our area – projects and improvements	A visual layout of the local board area summarising key demographic information and showing key projects and facilities in the area.
Performance report	Provides performance measure results for each activity, providing explanations where targeted service levels have not been achieved. Includes the activity highlights and challenges.
Our performance explained	Highlights of the local board’s work programme which contributed to a performance outcome
Local flavour	A profile of either an outstanding resident, grant, project or facility that benefits the local community.
Funding impact statement	Financial performance results compared to long-term plan and annual plan budgets, together with explanations about variances.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

6. The council’s climate change disclosures are covered in volume four of the annual report and sections within the summary annual report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

7. Council departments and council-controlled organisations comments and views have been considered and included in the annual report in relation to activities they are responsible for delivering on behalf of local boards.

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

Local impacts and local board views

8. Local board feedback will be included where possible. Any changes to the content of the final annual report will be discussed with the chairperson.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

9. The annual report provides information on how Auckland Council has progressed its agreed priorities in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031 over the past 12 months. This includes engagement with Māori, as well as projects that benefit various population groups, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

10. The annual report provides a retrospective view on both the financial and service performance in each local board area for the financial year 2023/2024.

11. There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

12. The annual report is a legislatively required document. It is audited by Audit New Zealand who assess if the report represents information fairly and consistently, and that the financial statements comply with accounting standard PBE FRS-43: Summary Financial Statements. Failure to demonstrate this could result in a qualified audit opinion.

13. The annual report is a key communication to residents. It is important to tell a clear and balanced performance story, in plain English and in a form that is accessible, to ensure that council meets its obligations to be open with the public it serves.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

14. The next steps for the draft 2023/2024 Annual Report for the local board are:

· Audit NZ review during August and September 2024

· report to the Governing Body for adoption on 26 September 2024

· physical copies provided to local board offices, council service centres and libraries by the end of October 2023.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft Howick Local Board Annual Report 2023/2024

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Audrey Gan - Lead Financial Advisor Local Boards

Authorisers

Faithe Smith – Manager Local Board Financial Advisory

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Adoption of Eke Panuku Howick Local Board Engagement Plan 2024-2025

File No.: CP2024/11795

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Eke Panuku Howick Local Board Engagement Plan 2024/2025.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku) is building a more structured and effective process to engage with the local board.

3. This engagement approach aims to tailor interactions based on project priorities and local relevance, ensuring efficient and effective partnerships across the Auckland region.

4. The engagement plan (attachment A) records Eke Panuku and the local board’s commitment to work together. It includes:

· Eke Panuku responsibilities

· Local board commitments

· Detailed engagement approach

· A schedule of Eke Panuku activities in the local board area.

5. The engagement approach consists of:

· Annual review – Eke Panuku will conduct an annual review of the engagement plan, ensuring its continued relevance and effectiveness.

· Ongoing engagement –Eke Panuku will provide a six-monthly report to update on the agreed list of activities.

· Reactive engagement - Eke Panuku commits to the free flow of information with the local board regarding issues of interest, responding promptly to the local board’s queries and requests for information.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whai / adopt the Eke Panuku Howick Local Board Engagement Plan 2024/2025 (Attachment A).

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that Eke Panuku will provide six-monthly memorandum updates on the following items:

i. 65 Haddington Drive, Ormiston

ii. Eastern Busway Urban Regeneration Programme

iii. Ormiston Development sites

iv. 56 Brookview Drive

c) whakamana / authorise the local board chair to sign this engagement plan on behalf of the local board.

Horopaki

Context

6. The CCO Joint Engagement Plans were adopted in July 2021 to align with recommendations in the CCO Review 2020 and direction in the CCO Statement of Expectations 2021.

7. The concept aimed to ensure that CCOs reported regularly and relevantly to local boards about their programmes of work in local areas.

8. These initial CCO Joint Engagement Plans expired in July 2023.

9. Local boards have reported that engagement plans are a useful tool to improve relations with CCOs and coordinate CCO actions at a local level.

10. Eke Panuku is the council-controlled organisation that delivers urban regeneration in Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland. Urban regeneration is revitalising and improving urban areas to enhance their economic, social, cultural and environmental conditions.

11. Eke Panuku has two core functions:

· Leads urban regeneration across Tāmaki Makaurau, focusing on town centres and locations agreed with the council.

· Manages a large property portfolio of $2.6 billion of council non-service properties and provides property-related services to the council group.

12. Eke Panuku is committed to giving effect to the Tāmaki Makaurau shared governance model and to achieving outcomes for Aucklanders, as well as building and maintaining a culture of collaboration across the council group.

13. This engagement plan covers relevant Eke Panuku activities in the local board area, noting that each project and/or activity will have its relevant engagement planning and approaches, Eke Panuku will report on those separately.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. The revised engagement approach aims to tailor interactions based on project priorities and local relevance, ensuring efficient and effective partnerships between Eke Panuku and local boards.

15. The new approach is designed to be more efficient and scalable, allowing Eke Panuku to adjust engagement levels based on priorities and workload in each area.

Key principles for working together

16. A successful working relationship between the local board and Eke Panuku is founded on:

· a shared understanding and mutual respect for the roles, responsibilities and decision-making authority of the local board and Eke Panuku;

· transparent and timely communication with no surprises;

· understanding and acknowledgement of shared responsibilities between the parties;

· a commitment to early inclusion in the planning and decision-making process where issues have specific relevance to the local board;

· a commitment to flexibility in terms of engagement, recognising differing levels of interest and local relevance across the Auckland region.

17. The levels of engagement with the local board on the various activities are derived from the International Association for Public Participation framework, and are as follows:

	Commitment
Inform	We will keep you informed.
Consult	We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how your input influenced the decision. We will seek your feedback on drafts and proposals.
Collaborate	We will work with you to formulate solutions and incorporate your input into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

18. Eke Panuku will deliver on the engagement plan as shown in the table below:

Annually	· Review the engagement plan. · Confirm the list of local activities to be included in the engagement plan. · Report to the local board to formally adopt the engagement plan.
Ongoing engagement	· Provide a six-monthly memo to update the agreed activities. · Provide information and briefings as required.
Activity criteria	· Activities of governance interest to the local board. · Activities that require community engagement or consultation. · Activities in the local board area with high public and media interest.
Reactive	Eke Panuku commits to the free flow of information with the local board regarding issues of interest, responding to the local board’s queries and requests for information promptly.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. The adoption of the engagement plan does not have a direct impact on climate.

20. Eke Panuku is committed to work within Te Taruke-a-Tawhiri: Auckland's Climate Action Framework and information on climate impacts will be provided to local boards on a project or programme basis.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The engagement plan will be shared with the relevant council and CCO staff and is expected to give staff a greater visibility of Eke Panuku activities.

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

Local impacts and local board views

22. Eke Panuku will engage with the local board as per the agreed engagement approach.

23. The engagement plan provides an opportunity to keep the community and interested stakeholders up to date with Eke Panuku activities in the local board area.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

24. The adoption of the engagement plan does not have a direct impact on Māori. Eke Panuku has structured engagement processes with Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

25. The adoption of the engagement plan does not have financial impacts on local boards.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. It is likely that there will be changes made to some items in the engagement plan during the year, or to the level of engagement with the local board. This risk is mitigated by ensuring that the local board is informed and involved promptly of any potential changes.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. Eke Panuku will implement the new approach and provide a six-monthly memorandum to the local board to update on its relevant activities.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft Eke Panuku Howick Local Board Engagement Plan 2024/2025

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Carlos Rahman - Principal Governance and Engagement Advisor

Authorisers

Jo Brothers, Acting GM Stakeholder and Community Relations

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Thriving Rangatahi

File No.: CP2024/13414

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board endorsement of Thriving Rangatahi, the council’s commitment and plan to support the wellbeing of children and young people.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. In 2023 staff completed a comprehensive review of I Am Auckland, the council’s strategy for children and young people.

3. The review found the strategy was not adequately addressing the needs of children and young people and that council could better target support to those facing the greatest disparities in outcomes.

4. As the review findings aligned closely with council’s community wellbeing strategy, Ngā Hapori Momoho / Thriving Communities, the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee approved “nesting” priorities for children and young people under this.

5. Thriving Rangatahi sets out council’s commitment and plan to support the wellbeing of children and young people within this nested approach (Attachment A).

6. It has five focus areas based on the review findings and what children and young told us was important to their wellbeing: civic participation, climate and the environment, connection and belonging, health and wellbeing and access to opportunities.

7. These contribute to Ngā Hapori Momoho’s outcomes for community wellbeing and ensure a strong child and youth focus on council’s investment decisions and activities.

8. Thriving Rangatahi recognises that while council has important roles to play, we don’t hold all the levers in supporting child and youth wellbeing. Working with others, including government, iwi and community will be critical to success.

9. It proposes four ways of working to improve wellbeing outcomes: working in partnership, targeting our efforts to those who need it most, using mana-enhancing approaches; and ensuring there is a youth voice in decision-making.

10. Informal feedback from local boards during workshops in July / August was generally supportive of the focus areas and council’s roles in supporting children and young people.

11. There is a perceived risk that nesting under Ngā Hapori Momoho will reduce council’s commitment to children and young people. Maintaining accountability and promoting youth voice will help mitigate this.

12. Following endorsement and formal feedback from local boards, Thriving Rangatahi will be reported to the Policy and Planning Committee for approval.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) ohia / endorse Thriving Rangatahi and provide any feedback.

Horopaki

Context

13. In 2023 staff completed a comprehensive review of I Am Auckland, the council’s strategy for children and young people. The purpose of the review was to take stock of progress and consider if the strategy was fit for the future.

14. The engagement methodology and findings are detailed in the Voices of children and young people from Tāmaki Makaurau report and the full review findings are detailed in the I Am Auckland three-year review report.

Most children and young people in Auckland are doing well

15. The review found that most children and young people are doing well. Children and young people in Auckland are active and have strong relationships with trusted adults.

16. Children and young people told us they love their communities, the diversity of Auckland and all the opportunities that come with living in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Some children and young people face persistent issues

17. Some children and young people are growing up in poverty and living in substandard housing. They told us about their families struggling to afford basic necessities and keep food on the table.

18. We heard that deteriorating mental health is an urgent issue for children and young people in Auckland. They told us about the harms of substance abuse, and the difficulties of growing up while facing discrimination.

19. Tamariki and rangatahi Māori, Pasifika children and young people, rainbow children and young people, and disabled children are more likely to experience inequity across a range of measures than their peers.

The context for growing up in Auckland has changed for children and young people

20. The review found the context for children and young people has changed significantly since I Am Auckland was adopted in 2013.

21. Emerging scenarios such as climate disruption, declining mental health, growing wealth inequality and the changing nature of work and education all impact on the wellbeing of children and young people.

The findings led to four key insights about the needs of children and young people

22. The findings from engagement with children and young people led to four key insights to help inform our strategic direction. These insights highlight what is important to children and young people in Auckland today.

· Community spaces are critical to children and young people’s wellbeing.

· Children and young people need to get around the region safely and reliably.

· Children and young people need loving and accepting relationships and communities.

· We need to involve children and young people in the big decisions about the region.

23. The Auckland Council Group plays a central role in providing community spaces, providing safe and reliable transport options, fostering connection and belonging across Auckland, and ensuring diverse Aucklanders have a say in decisions for the region.

24. When delivering services and making investment decisions, the council can consider these insights and the impacts of our decision-making for children and young people.

The review findings also led to some new opportunities for council

25. The review also identified some new opportunities to inform the way we work. These opportunities allow council to better support the needs of children and young people in Auckland based on evidence, including the voices of children and young people.

Figure 1 Findings from the review and new opportunities for council

Council agrees to a new approach to support child and youth wellbeing

26. Many of the review findings and opportunities align closely with council’s community wellbeing strategy, Ngā Hapori Momoho / Thriving Communities.

27. Ngā Hapori Momoho has a strong focus on equity; empowering community-led solutions; and supporting improved outcomes for Māori.

28. The review recommended that we nest priorities for children and young people under Ngā Hapori Momoho to:

· respond to the changing context facing children and young people

· progress partnerships required when facing long-term and complex issues

· deliver on the request to consolidate council strategies without diminishing our commitment to improving child and youth wellbeing.

29. In October 2023, the Planning, Environment and Parks Committee received the three-year review of I Am Auckland and agreed to a new approach to “nest” council’s strategic priorities for children and young people under Ngā Hapori Momoho (PEPCC/2023/128).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Five focus areas can help council deliver outcomes for children and young people

30. Through engagement we heard what matters most to children and young people and what their aspirations are for the future. This has been organised into five themes or focus areas for council.

31. These are what we need to focus on to create positive outcomes for children and young people.

32. The five focus areas are:

Figure 2 Thriving Rangatahi Five Focus Areas

33. These focus areas align to the objectives in Ngā Hapori Momoho and support delivery of its outcomes. Thriving Rangatahi provides a youth lens to the vision to create a fairer, more sustainable Tāmaki Makaurau where every Aucklander feels like they belong.

The council has six key roles that contribute to wellbeing outcomes

34. Under the Local Government Act 2002, local government must enable democratic local decision-making and action and promote the social, economic, environmental and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and future.

35. There are many ways Auckland Council can contribute to community wellbeing. The different roles of council fit into the six broad categories listed below.

Figure 3 Six roles of council to support community wellbeing

Council has roles alongside others to support children and young people

36. The council group already contributes significantly to many of the five focus areas. However, many of the issues facing children and young people are systemic and complex and cannot be solved by council alone.

37. The wellbeing of children and young people is dependent on different players including central government, iwi, organisations, communities and whānau.

38. When determining our role in supporting child and youth wellbeing it is important to acknowledge the wider ecosystem of support and work together to meet the needs of communities.

39. Aligned to council’s six broad levers, Thriving Rangatahi identifies some specific roles council plays that support the wellbeing of children and young people and their whānau, as set out in the table below.

Table 1 Council's roles to support the wellbeing of children and young people

Services and programmes

· Continue to provide services tailored to the needs of tamariki and rangatahi.

Council as facilitator

· Strengthen local networks and facilitate sharing of resources.

Partnerships

· Partner with organisations and agencies to provide a joined-up response.

· Partner with communities to support their leadership.

Community funding and grants

· Resource children and young people to develop their own solutions.

· Support a whānau centred approach to health and wellbeing.

Council workforce

· Create employment pathways and development opportunities for rangatahi.

· Provide capability training for staff.

Facilities, parks and open space

· Provide safe and accessible spaces where children and young people feel welcome.

Leadership and advocacy

· Advocate for the needs of children and young people.

· Pilot new and innovative ways of working with children and young people.

Learning and skills

· Provide programmes and services that incorporate learning and skill development.

· Provide employment initiatives that support youth getting into the workforce.

Transport

· Connect children and young people to the places they want to go safely and reliably.

· Provide multiple transport options.

Urban form

· Reinforce Auckland’s bicultural foundation and reflect our diversity.

· Ensure our urban form provides opportunities to connect, promotes health and wellbeing and connects people to art and nature.

New ways of working to address the challenges facing children and young people

40. To deliver better outcomes for all children and young people the council also needs to change the way we work. Thriving Rangatahi proposes four approaches that are based on best practice evidence of what works and the voices of children and young people.

41. These closely align to the key shifts and investment principles outlined in Ngā Hapori Momoho and affirm the connection between the wellbeing of children and young people and the wellbeing of their whānau and wider communities.

42. More information on the focus areas and key ways of working can be found in Attachment A.

Table 2 Thriving Rangatahi four ways of working

Our ways of working
Working in partnership	A targeted approach
Partner with others to deliver more joined-up responses that leverage impact and support improve outcomes. Issues such as deteriorating mental health, poverty, and access to safe, warm and dry housing are complex and require long-term joined-up responses. Council does not hold all the levers and must work in partnership with central government, iwi, child and youth organisations and communities to create positive change.	Target our support to those children and young people facing the greatest disparities in outcomes. This is an equity-based approach that targets support to those who need it most. Achieving equity requires us to examine the barriers some children and young people experience that mean they do not have access to the same opportunities or achieve the same outcomes. It may require additional resources and different approaches.
Effective and mana-enhancing	A voice in decision-making
Use best practice, mana enhancing and culturally grounded ways of working to deliver more impact. These are based on foundational principles important to working effectively with children and young people: · culturally responsive · strengths-based · whānau-centred · co-designed. Targeting support to key life stages (first 1000 days and early adolescence) can also deliver more long-term impacts.	Ensure children and young people have a voice in decisions that impact them. Rangatahi feel they remain under-represented and largely voiceless in community decision-making. They are often considered the leaders of tomorrow, but many are already leaders today. Rangatahi feel that government agencies do not listen or when they do listen, they do not act on what they hear. To develop rangatahi potential will require adults to empower them to take an active role in decision-making.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

43. Children and young people told us about their love for Auckland’s environment including the beaches, parks and open spaces. They want to be connected to nature and care for the environment.

44. Council kaimahi told us that children and young people are experiencing climate anxiety, and that climate disruption will have significant impacts on Auckland and in particular children and young people. The decisions we make today will have long-term and far-reaching impacts for generations to come.

45. One of the five focus areas is climate and the environment. Through renewed commitment to the wellbeing of children and young people we can promote a strong child and youth voice in climate action and decision-making.

46. Through the civic voice focus area, we can help to build the leadership and capability of our young people to enable them to be involved in leading climate change action and being part of the change they want to see in Tāmaki Makaurau.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

47. Council’s commitment to children and young people through Thriving Rangatahi sits under Nga Hapori Momoho / Thriving Communities which is a core strategy for the whole council group.

48. Council staff and the Youth Advisory Panel have participated in the development of the focus areas and helped identify the roles and activities we do that support the wellbeing of children and young people.

49. We will continue to work with council staff to develop tools and build capability to implement the new ways of working and ensure children and young people have a voice in decision-making.

50. We are working to build relationships with council-controlled organisations to create a joined-up response across the council group and embed the focus areas, ways of working (key shifts, investment principles); and youth voice.

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Local boards play a pivotal role in understanding and responding to the needs of children and young people and whānau in their local areas.

52. Thriving Rangatahi recognises that the needs of children and young people vary across communities. This means shifting from one-size fits all to more targeted approaches that respond to local community needs and enable community-led solutions.

53. Many local boards have statements and objectives in their plans to meet the needs of children and young people in their area. Local boards are delivering wellbeing outcomes through their work plans and responding to the diverse needs of their communities.

54. We held workshops with 21 local boards during July and August to introduce the new approach of nesting strategic priorities for children and young people under Ngā Hapori Momoho.

55. During the workshops we asked for initial feedback and answered questions about the review findings and how we will action council’s continued commitment to supporting the wellbeing of children and young people.

56. We analysed the feedback and the key themes are summarised below:

· Council struggles with ensuring a diverse youth voice is represented in decision-making and there is a desire for more information and advice on this.

· Safe and affordable transport options are a key issue for local boards.

· There were mixed responses to the climate and environment focus area with some local boards very happy to see this clearly represented and others were unsure if this was as important as other focus areas.

· There were many questions and comments about council’s role. Some local boards agreed our actions deliver wellbeing outcomes; however some local boards were concerned about overlap with central government’s role.

· Local boards were very interested in how Thriving Rangatahi can be implemented at a local level and how this relates to other strategies.

57. Feedback from local boards has helped to shape Thriving Rangatahi. For example, more information on council’s role and the actions council can take to support children and young people was added to address some of the concerns.

58. A full summary of feedback from the 21 local board workshops and how it has been considered, is attached to this report (Attachment B).

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

59. Tamariki and rangatahi are taonga, treasured members of Māori communities and whānau.

60. Over half of the Māori population (50.1 per cent) in Auckland is under 25 years old.

61. Māori children and young people are more likely than the rest of the Auckland population to face disparities across multiple outcomes, including many measures in health and wellbeing.

62. Thriving Communities, Kia Ora Tāmaki Makaurau, and the Independent Māori Statutory Board Māori Plan all emphasise whānau and youth wellbeing as an issue of significance.

63. Māori children and young people made up 12 per cent of total engagement responses for the review of I Am Auckland, and 25 per cent of participants in targeted engagement methods such as empathy interviews and spoken word poetry workshops.

64. The voices of tamariki and rangatahi Māori provided valuable insights for the development of the Thriving Rangatahi focus areas and the four ways of working.

65. Culturally appropriate and mana-enhancing ways of engaging are crucial to achieving better outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori.

66. Te ao Māori, in alignment with evidence and best practice, tells us that the wellbeing of children and young people is interconnected to the wellbeing of whānau.

67. Applying a whānau lens to services and programmes allows council to uplift the wellbeing of children and young people through achieving positive outcomes for their whānau.

68. Uplifting the voices of tamariki and rangatahi Māori and prioritising their needs and aspirations in the design of spaces and programmes offered by council will create a welcoming and safe environment for all whānau. Welcoming spaces, programmes and services are essential to ensuing everyone has access to the same opportunities.

69. Thriving Rangatahi is a commitment by council to work differently. Targeting resources to achieve more equitable outcomes, partnering with others; and working in ways that are mana-enhancing and culturally appropriate will support improved outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi and whānau Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

70. There are no additional budget implications arising from the decision in this report.

71. Thriving Rangatahi is nested under Ngā Hapori Momoho which does not have specific budget attached to it. The strategy provides focus for the use of council’s existing resources and investment, and direction on how we need to work to deliver more impact.

72. Local boards can target their resources to the needs of their communities. This can include decisions on how facilities and open spaces are used and designed, what programs are delivered, and which partners they collaborate with in the community.

73. Any additional investment to support new activities for children and young people will go through normal long-term and annual planning budget processes.

74. The policy work to develop Thriving Rangatahi has been delivered through existing resources (staff time and some costs for engagement and materials).

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

75. The table below presents the key risk to council through this work and how it can be mitigated.

Table 3 Risk and mitigation

Then

Possible mitigations

The “nested” approach results in a real or perceived loss of focus on the needs of children and young people in Auckland.

Trust and relationships between council and stakeholders (children and young people, partners, for example) could weaken.

Council’s reputation is challenged because it is not seen to be prioritising a critical population group.

Strategic investment decisions directed at child and youth wellbeing do not improve outcomes.

A low reputational, strategic, and delivery risk.

Thriving Rangatahi includes a clear mandate to focus on children and young people, which clarifies council’s role and commitment.

Socialise with staff and leverage off current traction with the implementation of Ngā Hapori Momoho.

A monitoring and evaluation framework will be developed aligned to Ngā Hapori Momoho to hold the council group accountable for its commitment to child and youth wellbeing.

Staff are involved in the creation of implementation tools and frameworks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

76. After receiving formal feedback from local boards at their September business meetings, staff will present Thriving Rangatahi to the Policy and Planning Committee in November for approval.

77. If approved, staff will develop a monitoring and evaluation framework aligned with Ngā Hapori Momoho. The timeline for this work is subject to the development of a performance measurement framework for the long-term plan.

78. Staff will continue to develop tools such as best practice engagement guidelines to help build capability for implementation.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Thriving Rangatahi
b ⇨	Local board feedback from Thriving Rangatahi workshops

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Caroline Stephens - Senior Policy Advisor

Mackenzie Blucher - Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Liz Civil - Senior Policy Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Kōkiri Report - LBTCF

File No.: CP2024/13650

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek decisions from Howick Local Board about three projects outlined in the Kōkiri Agreement and to seek formal feedback on Auckland Transport’s proposal to make improvements to a zebra crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach.

2. The decisions required pertain to Local Board Transport Capital (LBTCF) projects - being a raised pedestrian crossing at #6 Valderama Drive, Flat Bush; realigning and raising the pedestrian crossing at #47 Paparoa Road, Cockle Bay; and introducing speed humps to Michael Jones Drive as a traffic calming measure.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Auckland Transport (AT) seeks three decisions for Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) projects; the proposal to raise the existing pedestrian crossing at #6 Valderama Drive, Flat Bush; the proposal to realign raise the pedestrian crossing on #47 Paparoa Road, Cockle Bay; and the proposal to introduce speed humps to Michael Jones Drive as a traffic calming measure.

4. These three projects have all been publicly consulted and the results of the consultations were discussed with the local board on 29 August 2024. Sentiment for the raised crossings was positive and mainly positive for the Michael Jones Drive speed calming.

5. Construction of these projects will capitalise on the LBTCF investment so far in design and consultation and AT’s advice is for the local board to authorise that these projects move to detailed design and delivery.

6. In regard to the AT proposal to raise the existing zebra crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach, we would like to provide the local board with an opportunity to provide formal feedback. This proposal was discussed with the local board at a workshop on 29 August 2024 and our advice is that this project should continue to delivery.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) authorise Auckland Transport to upgrade the current pedestrian crossing at # 6 Valderama Drive to a raised crossing as per the plan presented to the Howick Local Board at workshops on 29 August 2024 and recorded in this report.

b) authorise Auckland Transport to upgrade the current pedestrian crossing at #47 Paparoa Road to a raised crossing as per the plan presented to the Howick Local Board at workshops on 29 August 2024 and recorded in this report.

c) authorise Auckland Transport to install seven speed humps along the length of Michael Jones Drive, as per the plan presented to the Howick Local Board at workshops on 29 August 2024 and recorded in this report.

d) provide formal feedback to the proposal to upgrade the crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach as follows:

Horopaki

Context

7. AT manages Auckland’s transport network on behalf of Auckland Council. AT’s Kōkiri Agreement provides a structured annual process for local boards to engage with and influence transport projects and programmes. Every year local boards and AT work together to set ‘levels of engagement’ for projects and programmes that AT is delivering. This process clearly defines the board’s expectations and AT’s responsibilities.

8. The levels of engagement noted in the Kōkiri Agreement are derived from the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) doctrine, were agreed between Auckland Council and Council Controlled Organisations in 2020; and are as follows:

a) Collaborate - AT and the local board are working together to deliver the project or programme. The local board leads the process of building community consensus. The local board’s input and advice are used to formulate solutions and develop plans. Local board feedback is incorporated into the plan to the maximum extent possible.

b) Consult - AT leads the project or programme but works with the local board providing opportunities to input into the plan. If possible, AT incorporates the local board’s feedback into the plan; and if it is not able to provides clear reasons for that decision.

c) Inform – AT leads the project or programme but works with the local board providing opportunities to input into the plan. If possible, AT incorporates the local board’s feedback into the plan; and if it is not able to provides clear reasons for that decision.

9. Any ‘Collaborate’ or ‘Consult’ project involves local board decisions that need to be taken and recorded, this report is to provide the decisions relating to the delivery of the following local board transport capital projects:

a) #6 Valderama Drive, Raised Pedestrian Crossing

b) #47 Paparoa Road Raised Pedestrian Crossing

c) Michael Jones Drive Speed Calming.

10. AT notes that the level of engagement in the Kōkiri Agreement for the Gills Road proposal is inform and we are giving the local board an opportunity to provide formal feedback on this proposal through this report.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

#6 Valderama Drive, Flat Bush

11. AT staff provided advice to the local board about this proposal, that aims to improve safety at the local school. At workshops on 25 January, 29 February, 28 March and 29 August 2024 AT subject matter experts (SME) discussed the options they had reviewed to achieve the project’s objectives. The SMEs also provided advice about how their engineering process balanced the advantages and disadvantages of the options.

12. Specifically, that in this circumstance the close proximity of Amaretto Avenue and the bend in Valderama Road provides very limited options for a different crossing location that still meets the objective of keeping children safe.

13. Engagement with the community has been undertaken and feedback was positive. Comments noted that the proposal would make it safer for pedestrians, especially children and address speeding.

14. Engagement with both Mission Heights Primary School and Mission Heights Junior College was supportive of the proposed changes.

15. Discussion was held with the local board on 29 August 2024 with regards to the community feedback. AT’s advice is to deliver a raised pedestrian crossing, supported by ‘No Stopping’ zones that protect sightlines for people using the crossing. See Fig 1, below.

16. This project is a LBTCF project, that is at ‘Collaborate’ level of engagement, so requires the board to authorise the proposed plan.

Figure 1 – Map of proposed works on Valderama Road.

#47 Paparoa Road, Cockle Bay

17. This project aims to improve safety for children and parents from Cockle Bay School who cross Paparoa Street to access the parking area on Paparoa Road by the cemetery.

18. The current zebra sits at an unusual angle and the proposal is to realign the existing zebra crossing and raise it to both slow vehicles and provide better visibility to motorists of those using the crossing.

19. At workshops on 25 January, 29 February, 28 March and 29 August 2024, AT subject matter experts discussed the options they had reviewed to achieve the project’s objectives.

20. Raising and realigning the crossing does affect carpark space numbers but adapting a redundant bus stop to provide more parking has compensated for any parking loss.

21. Engagement with the community has been undertaken and feedback was generally positive. Those in support commented that the proposal would improve visibility, make it safer for pedestrians, especially children, address frequent near misses and address speeding.

22. The negative comments included concern about congestion, the view that the money would be best spent elsewhere and some, although they agreed with realigning the crossing, felt it should not be a raised crossing.

23. Discussion was held with the local board on 29 August 2024 with regards to the community feedback. AT’s advice is to realign the crossing and raise it, supported by ‘No Stopping’ zones that protect sightlines for people using the crossing. See Fig 2, below.

24. This project is a LBTCF project, that is at ‘Collaborate’ level of engagement, so requires the board to authorise the proposed plan.

Figure 2 – Map of proposed works on Paparoa Road

Michael Jones Drive, Flat Bush

25. AT staff provided advice to the local board about this proposal, that aims to improve safety and lower speeds on Michael Jones Drive, Flatbush.

26. At workshops on 25 January, 29 February, 28 March and 29 August 2024, AT subject matter experts discussed the options they had reviewed to achieve the project’s objectives.

27. Engagement with the community has been undertaken and while feedback was mixed those in support commented that the proposal would make the road safer especially for pedestrians, especially kids; address speeding issues and make for a safer environment with little inconvenience to drivers.

28. Those who did not support the proposal commented that seven humps are too many; that the proposal will increase emissions and wear and tear on vehicles; and impact on emergency vehicles response time. Further comments were that speeds are low enough now and that the parking of trucks on Michael Jones Drive is the problem, and not speeding.

29. Discussion was held with the local board on 29 August 2024 with regards to the community feedback. Particularly the difference in effects between five and seven humps was discussed. Given the project objective was to improve safety, address speeding issues and deter “rat-running” through Michael Jones Drive, AT’s advice was that seven humps would provide a better outcome. Noting that 53% of community feedback was positive, 10% was mixed and 37% was negative. This project is a LBTCF project, that is at ‘Collaborate’ level of engagement, so requires the board to authorise the proposed plan. See Figure 3 below.

Figure 3 – Map of proposed works on Michael Jones Drive

Gills Road, Bucklands Beach

30. AT staff provided advice to the local board on 29 August 2024 about this proposal, that aims to improve safety, lower speeds and address child safety concerns on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach.

31. We have received multiple requests from the community to upgrade the existing zebra crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach. Concerns expressed were around visibility of school children on the crossing and reports of drivers speeding or not stopping for pedestrians. Vehicle speeds on Gills Road were noted as higher than the posted speed limit and the 85% speed recorded as 54.4km/hr.

32. Public consultation was undertaken in June and July 2024 and 21 responses were received of which 18 were positive. Those in support noted that raising the crossing would improve safety for children walking to Macleans Primary School and Bucklands Beach Intermediate. They also noted the many instances of bad driver behaviour at this crossing.

33. Macleans Primary School also indicated its support for raising the crossing.

34. If supported by the local board, the project will move to detailed design and delivery in late 2024 or early 2025. See Figure 4 below.

Figure 4 – Map of Proposed Raised Crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

35. AT engages closely with the council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and the council’s priorities.

36. AT reviews the potential climate impacts of all projects and works hard to minimise carbon emissions. AT’s work programme is influenced by council direction through Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

37. The local board transport capital projects were initiated by Howick Local Board and do not impact on Council facilities.

38. The Gills Road project is being undertaken by AT and does not impact on Council facilities.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39. The local board transport capital projects were initiated by Howick Local Board and were workshopped with members prior to this report being submitted. At that workshop, local board members expressed support for all of the proposals outlined in this report, including the Gills Road project.

40. Likewise, the local community has been engaged with and provided generally positive feedback on all of the proposed projects.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

42. AT’s Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua tribes 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

43. In this case, neither decision involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water so specific Māori input was not sought.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

44. The local board transport capital project decisions in this report do have financial implications, reducing the LBTCF by the following amounts:

a) # 47 Paparoa Road - budget allocated at $409,521

b) # 6 Valderama Road – budget allocated at $375,000

c) Michael Jones Drive – budget allocated at $450,000

45. The proposal to upgrade the existing crossing on Gills Road, Bucklands Beach has no financial implications for the local board.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

46. The proposed decisions do have some risk, any construction project can be affected by a range of factors including weather, contract availability or discovery of previously un-identified factors like unmapped infrastructure.

47. AT manages risk by retaining a 10% contingency on the projects and historically there are several occasions in the organisation has used budget surpluses in other programmes to support delivery of the LBTCF. However, there is always a small risk that more money may be required from the LBTCF.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

48. The following activities or actions are planned:

a) If the Howick Local Board resolves to support the Valderama Drive project, then the project will continue to detailed design and construction and will be delivered before June 2025.

b) If the Howick Local Board resolves to support the Paparoa Road project, then the project will continue to detailed design and construction will be delivered by June 2025.

c) If the Howick Local Board resolves to support the Michael Jones Drive project then the project will continue to detailed design and construction will be delivered by June 2025.

d) With local board support, the Gills Road project will move to detailed design and likely delivery in late 2024 or early 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Lorna Stewart - Elected Member Relationship Partner
Authoriser	John Gillespie, Head of Stakeholder and Community Engagement

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Auckland Transport Kōkiri / Local Board Transport Agreement Quarterly Update - September 2024

File No.: CP2024/13595

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on projects in the local board’s Kōkiri / Local Board Transport Agreement 2024-2025 (Kōkiri Agreement).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Kōkiri Agreement 2024-2025 is a local board’s engagement plan with Auckland Transport’s (AT) work programme.

3. Developing the agreement is an annual process. During this process AT provides advice on its work programme, seeks feedback from the local board, responds to this feedback, and establishes an endorsed plan for engaging on work in the local board area.

4. This report provides an update on projects in the local board’s Kōkiri Agreement.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the September 2024 quarterly update on the Kōkiri / Local Board Transport Agreement 2024-2025.

Horopaki

Context

5. In mid-2023, development of the Kōkiri Agreement was initiated to build a more structured and supportive relationship between local boards and Auckland Transport. The Kōkiri Agreement is formed thru an annual process that includes the following steps:

October/November	AT provides quality advice to local boards on the next financial year’s work programme.
March	Local boards provide their feedback, prioritise projects or programmes, and request levels of engagement for each project.
April/May	AT responds to that feedback, and a Kōkiri Agreement is written for each local board.
June/July	AT seeks formal endorsement of the Kōkiri Agreement from local boards.

6. AT reports quarterly on the prioritised projects and programmes listed in the local board’s Kōkiri Agreement.

7. This process provides a clear annual structure for engaging with AT. Local boards are able to influence Auckland Transport’s work programme through the annual Kōkiri Agreement process.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

8. Kōkiri Agreements prioritise the projects or programmes that are of most interest to the local board. Clear local board prioritisation provides Auckland Transport with expectations of transport related objectives, in addition to the objectives provided in the local board plan. This information helps AT to either inform its planning or to offer better explanations for why certain projects or programmes cannot be delivered.

9. However, plans evolve and change, so AT reports quarterly on progress of projects in the Kōkiri Agreement. This means that local boards are kept informed and have a regular opportunity to provide formal feedback to AT about their work programme.

10. The levels of engagement in the Kōkiri Agreement are derived from the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) doctrine and are as follows:

Collaboration	AT and the local board work together to deliver the project or programme. The local board leads the process of building community consensus. The local board’s input and advice are used to formulate solutions and develop plans. Local board feedback is incorporated into the plan to the maximum extent possible.
Consultation	AT leads the project or programme but works with the local board, providing opportunities to input into the plan. If possible, AT incorporates the local board’s feedback into the plan, and if it is not able to, provides clear reasons for that decision.
Informing	AT leads the project or programme informing the local board about progress. Local board members may be asked to provide their local knowledge and insight by AT, however there is no expectation that the project must be modified based on that input.

11. Attachment A provides updates about all projects and programmes currently listed in this local board’s Kōkiri Agreement 2024-2025.This report also includes the following attachments:

· Attachment B is a quarterly update on road maintenance activities

· Attachment C contains detailed information about remedial work to repair storm damage

· Attachment D is a quarterly update on local road related deaths and serious injuries.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

13. AT engages closely with the council on developing strategy, actions and measures to support the outcomes sought by the Auckland Plan 2050, the Auckland Climate Action Plan and the council’s priorities.

14. AT reviews the potential climate impacts of all projects and works hard to minimise carbon emissions. AT’s work programme is influenced by council direction through Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. The Kōkiri Agreement is a product of the Local Board Relationship Project. AT started the project in response to a 2022 ‘Letter of Expectation’ directive from the Mayor that stated in part that:

“The Statement of Intent 2023-2026 must set out how AT will achieve closer local board involvement in the design and planning stage of local transport projects that affect their communities.”

16. The Kōkiri Agreement gives effect to this intent. AT receives local board feedback via regular engagement. AT also surveys local board members quarterly about engagement, providing an indication of satisfaction.

17. The Kōkiri Agreement was developed working closely with Auckland Council’s Governance and Engagement Department.

18. The Kōkiri Agreement is reported to the Local Board Chair’s Forum on a regular basis.

19. This work relies on historical engagement with both Auckland Council and with other major council-controlled organisations (CCO) through the previous joint CCO engagement plans.

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

Local impacts and local board views

20. The local board endorsed the Kōkiri Agreement 2024-2025 at their July business meeting. This report provides the first quarterly update on projects in the agreement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

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

22. AT’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

23. The Kōkiri Agreement is focused on AT’s interaction with local boards, as such Māori input was not sought at a programme level. However, when individual projects or operational activities have impact on water or land, Auckland Transport engages with iwi to seek their views. These views are shared in reports seeking decisions from the local board.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

24. Generally, this report has limited financial implications for the local board because Auckland Transport funds all projects and programmes. However, local boards do have a transport budget, called the Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

25. Updates about Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects are included in this report, but financial implications are reported separately, in project specific decision reports.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

26. If a local board provides any formal direction on changes to the Kōkiri Agreement, there are risks to consider. First, the local board needs to be able to commit to the time required for the level of engagement requested. If decisions are not able to be made or are slowed down by local board decision-making, there can be significant financial costs.

27. Auckland Transport suggests that this risk is mitigated by the local board providing sufficient workshop time to allow for timely discussion of activities listed in Kōkiri Agreement.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

28. After local boards receive this report, AT will respond to any additional resolutions.

29. The next quarterly report is planned for November 2024.

30. In October or November 2024, AT will conduct its annual forward works programme brief which starts the process to develop the Kōkiri Agreement 2025-2026.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Schedule of Kōkiri Agreement updates
b ⇨	Road maintenance activities

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Ben Stallworthy – Principal Advisor – Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Joint traffic bylaw review feedback report

File No.: CP2024/11728

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 Howick 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 will meet with and discuss the traffic bylaw review with the Howick local board at a workshop on 22 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 Howick 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

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Ben Stallworthy - Principal Advisor Strategic Relationships, Auckland Transport
Authoriser	Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Howick Local Board

19 September 2024

Amendment to the 2022-2025 Howick Local Board meeting schedule

File No.: CP2024/13407

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval to add two additional meeting dates to the 2022-2025 Howick Local Board meeting schedule in order to accommodate the Annual Budget 2025-2026 (Annual Plan) timeframes.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Howick Local Board adopted its 2022-2025 meeting schedule on Thursday, 8 December 2022 (HW/2022/199).

3. At that time the specific times and dates for meetings for local board decision-making in relation to the local board agreement as part of the Annual Budget were unknown.

4. The local board is being asked to approve two meeting dates as an addition to the Howick Local Board meeting schedule so that the modified Annual Budget timeframes can be met.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Howick Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve the addition of two meeting dates to the 2022-2025 Howick Local Board meeting schedule to accommodate the Annual Budget 2025-2026 timeframes as follows:

i) Thursday, 1 May 2025 at 1.30pm

ii) Thursday, 12 June 2025 at 1.30pm.

Horopaki

Context

5. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) have requirements regarding local board meeting schedules.

6. In summary, adopting a meeting schedule helps meet the requirements of:

· clause 19, Schedule 7 of the LGA on general provisions for meetings, which requires the chief executive to give notice in writing to each local board member of the time and place of meetings. Such notification may be provided by the adoption of a schedule of business meetings.

· sections 46, 46(A) and 47 in Part 7 of the LGOIMA, which requires that meetings are publicly notified, agendas and reports are available at least two working days before a meeting and that local board meetings are open to the public.

7. The Howick Local Board adopted its 2022-2025 business meeting schedule on Thursday, 8 December 2022 (HW/2022/199).

8. The timeframes for local board decision-making in relation to the Annual Budget were unavailable when the meeting schedule was originally adopted.

9. The board is being asked to make decisions in late-November 2024 and late-April / late May and early-June 2025 to feed into the Annual Budget processes. These timeframes are outside the board’s normal meeting cycle.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. The local board has two options for incorporating the meeting dates:

i) Include the meetings as additions to the meeting schedule.

ii) Include the meetings as extraordinary meetings.

11. For option one, statutory requirements allow enough time for these meetings to be scheduled as additions to the meeting schedule and other topics may be considered as per any other ordinary meeting. However, there is a risk that if the Annual Budget timeframes change again or the information is not ready for the meeting, there would need to be an additional extraordinary meeting scheduled.

12. For option two, only the specific topic the Annual Budget may be considered for which the meeting is being held. There is a risk that no other policies or plans with similar timeframes or running in relation to the Annual Budget process could be considered at this meeting.

13. Given there is sufficient time to meet statutory requirements, staff recommend option one, approving this meeting as an addition to the meeting schedule, as it allows more flexibility for the local board to consider a range of issues. This requires a decision of the local board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14. This decision is procedural in nature and any climate impacts will be negligible. The decision is unlikely to result in any identifiable changes to greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of climate change will not impact the decision’s implementation.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

15. There is no specific impact for the council group from this report.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16. This report requests the local board’s decision to schedule additional meetings and consider whether to approve them as extraordinary meetings or additions to the meeting schedule.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

17. There is no specific impact for Māori arising from this report. Local boards work with Māori on projects and initiatives of shared interest.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

18. There are no financial implications in relation to this report apart from the standard costs associated with servicing a business meeting.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

19. If the local board decides not to add this business meeting to the meeting schedule this would result in the input of the local board not being able to be presented to the Governing Body for consideration and inclusion in the Annual Budget.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

20. Implement the processes associated with preparing for business meetings.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors	Claire Bews - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Chairperson	Damian Light
Deputy Chairperson	Bo Burns
Members	Katrina Bungard
	David Collings
	Bruce Kendall
	John Spiller
	Mike Turinsky
	Adele White
	Peter Young, JP

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	19 September 2024, Howick Local Board - Howick Local Board Workshop Records - 15 August 2024 Record of Workshop
b ⇨	19 September 2024, Howick Local Board - Howick Local Board Workshop Records - 22 August Record of Workshop
c ⇨	19 September 2024, Howick Local Board - Howick Local Board Workshop Records - 29 August 2024 Record of Workshop
d ⇨	19 September 2024, Howick Local Board - Howick Local Board Workshop Records - 5 September 2024 Record of Workshop