Agenda of Puketāpapa Local Board - Thursday, 20 February 2025

1 Nau mai | Welcome

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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Thursday, 5 December 2024 as true and correct.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

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

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

6.1 New Year Honours List 2025

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. For the local board to note a formal acknowledgement on the meeting agenda.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The local board acknowledges and congratulates the local recipients of the New Year Honours List 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) acknowledge local recipients of the New Year Honours List 2025:

Companion of the King’s Service Order: Paul Zentveld from Mt Roskill for services to survivors of abuse in care. He has been advocating for the redress for survivors and recognition of events which occurred at the lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital Child and Adolescent Unit (Lake Alice Unit).

KSM and MNZM recipients as they serve the Puketāpapa Community though they live outside Puketāpapa.

King’s Service Medal: Peter Fala Aperila Leilua for services to the community, particularly youth and Pacific people.

King’s Service Medal: Tiliilagi Leilua for services to the community, particularly youth and Pacific people.

King’s Service Medal: Jyoti Parashar for her service to the community.

Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit: Dinesh Kumar Khadka service to the Nepalese community.

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

7.1 Petition: To Preserve Off-Leash Status for the Bowl Area at Monte Cecilia Park

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. A petition from Nicole Braganza and supporters about preserving the Bowl Area at Monte Cecilia Park as an off lease space.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. A petition will be presented from concerned dog owners about preserving the Bowl Area at Monte Cecilia Park as an off-leash space.

Petition Prayer states:

This petition urges the local board to preserve the Bowl Area at Monte Cecilia Park as an off-leash space. It is a vital community asset, fostering social connections and providing a safe exercise area for dogs. Restricting access would negatively impact responsible pet owners and reduce community enjoyment of the park

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whiwhi/ receive the petition.

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 Puketāpapa 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.

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

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.”

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

To seek adoption of the Puketāpapa Play Provision Assessment Revision (Attachment A).

File No.: CP2025/00663

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek adoption of the Puketāpapa Play Provision Assessment Revision (Attachment A).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Puketāpapa Local Board approved the Puketāpapa Play Provision Assessment Revision work programme item (Sharepoint ID: 3570) in June 2023.

3. The Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021) was produced to identify opportunities to improve the network of play experiences provided in the Puketāpapa Local Board area, to create a high-quality and equitable play network.

4. Staff have conducted an analysis of the current provision against gaps identified in the previous Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021). These included:

a) analysis of all play provision projects which have been completed since the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021)

b) an analysis of play provision projects currently programmed

c) consideration of additional themes relating to play that were not a focus in the previous document.

5. The additional themes are:

a) additional focus areas for play

b) evolved strategic thinking

c) stakeholder involvement.

6. An evolved strategic approach is a key feature within this document. Emphasis has been placed on resilience, growth, new thinking relating to ‘play’ and play space planning, as well as additional focus areas not considered in 2021. This indicates that we need to be adaptable in our approach to provision and how it is applied.

7. The document consolidates our commitment to continuous improvement. We view this document as live and evolving to accommodate further research and development relating to play.

8. Key Recommendations within the revision document are:

· Play Gap Analysis (2021) is still relevant and operative

· The Play Assessment Revision (2024) provides an addendum to the Play Gap Analysis (2021)

· Continue to develop and refine a citywide holistic view of how play will be delivered to Aucklanders based on identified service need across the play network

· Continue to focus on synergy between all internal teams and stakeholders with SME input into play projects at key project milestones.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whai / adopt the Puketāpapa Play Assessment Revision (Attachment A) to assist the local board in making decisions to improve the network of play experiences in Puketāpapa.

Horopaki

Context

9. The purpose of the review is to update the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis, produced in 2021, which assessed the current play network and provided recommendations to create a holistic play network across the local board area.

10. In recent years we have seen changing needs of recreational play environments for children and young people, due to the increasing influence of digital entertainment and social media.

11. Children and young people need space to disconnect from digital devices, express themselves, develop their fine and gross motor skills, as well as develop their strength and dexterity.

12. In the three years since the original assessment was adopted by the local board, some of the identified gaps in provision have been filled through both capex and renewals work programmes.

13. This review aims to expand upon the scope of the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021) and is intended to be an appendix to the document. This review is divided into four parts:

· review of the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021)

· identification of future considerations for play provision

· identification of additional strategic thinking requirements

· identification of stakeholder involvement.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

14. Completed Play Improvements

· Since 2021, the Puketāpapa Local Board has provided significant investment to improve the play network. Some improvements have been achieved through the renewal programme, while other investments into new play assets have resulted in new assets to fill identified gaps. Refer to Puketāpapa Play Assessment Revision 2024 (Attachment A, P7).

· While not being identified as high or medium priority, an additional seven projects have been undertaken through the scheduled renewals programme. These projects have also contributed to an improved play experience (Attachment A, P8).

15. Programmed Future Play Projects

· Works are scheduled to be carried out at five locations over the next several years. These projects are dependent on local board priorities and budgets (Attachment A, P9).

· The renewals programme will continue in line with asset condition rating and service need. The programme will reference the recommendations outlined in the 2021 report but will also consider additional play specific focus areas including optimisation where appropriate (Attachment A, P9).

16. Additional Focus Areas for Play

Increasing emphasis and consideration is being given to the following aspects of play since the 2021 Play Network Gap Analysis was adopted by the local board (Attachment A, P10).

· Mahere Ratonga mo te Tākaro is an internal council document developed in 2021 which guides the design and provision of play experiences in local parks (Attachment A, P10).

· Play Advocacy within Auckland Council promotes play as an everywhere activity, which is not necessarily asset focused or limited to parks. It also allows for diverse play opportunities to be considered (Attachment A, P11).

· Wheeled play provision can take several forms. Options include the use of perimeter walking paths, bike skills parks, learn-to-ride areas, pump tracks, flow bowls, mini-ramps (half pipes), in-situ concrete skateparks or a creative combination of these elements (Attachment A, P12).

· The use of best practice universal design principles incorporates features that are generally unnoticeable but are easier to use and more convenient. Accessibility is defined as the ability to enter, approach or pass to and from a place (Attachment A, P12).

· Research has shown that children’s play involves embracing fun challenges, mastering new skills, and enjoying the freedom to play anywhere, with anything, or with anyone (Attachment A, P13).

· It is recommended that play provision for older children in the Puketāpapa Local Board area needs to be clustered and easily accessible by walking, cycling and public transport routes, and have excellent Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles (Attachment A, P13).

17. Evolved Strategic Thinking

· An ongoing network view of parks and play provision across the Puketāpapa Local Board area is essential. It is not economically feasible, practical, or necessary to offer the same type and degree of provision in all neighbourhood or suburban parks (Attachment A, P14).

· An ongoing focus of clearly identifying play service needs across the network will ensure council can achieve value for money (Attachment A P14).

· Play equipment is evolving and the generic approach of placing the same equipment in all parks is no longer viable (Attachment A, P14).

· Many of our coastal and riparian reserves are susceptible to the impacts of sea level rise and weather events. Impacts can be severe when storm events align with heavy rainfall and king tides. Associated hazards need to be managed (Attachment A, P14).

· It is becoming increasingly important to undertake shoreline adaptation planning on parks and reserves that are vulnerable to these pressures (Attachment A, P15).

18. Stakeholder Involvement

· Early and meaningful engagement with mana whenua is essential for a holistic and inclusive process that reflects mana whenua values. Refer to Puketāpapa Play Assessment Revision 2024 (Attachment A P16).

· As part of any future development of the play network, mana whenua values relating to Te Aranga Design Principles should be incorporated. Refer to Puketāpapa Play Assessment Revision 2024 (Attachment A P16).

· Puketāpapa Local Board is a key Kāinga Ora location. With an expected 40,000 new residents over coming years. Careful analysis of Kāinga Ora proposals is being undertaken with a focus on stressing the importance of improved service provision and opportunities within the existing parks network. Refer to Puketāpapa Play Assessment Revision 2024 (Attachment A P16).

· The Making Space for Water programme, developed by Healthy Waters as part of Auckland Council’s flood recovery initiative, aims to accelerate planned flood management efforts across the region (Attachment A P17).

· The Puketāpapa Local Board has experienced and is likely to continue to experience ongoing challenges with flooding events (Attachment A P17).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

19. Formal play spaces contribute to climate change through carbon emissions, particularly during their construction and decommissioning phases. This needs to be considered when creating new or expanding existing play spaces.

20. The Puketāpapa Play Provision Assessment Revision enables strategic investment into play, identifying opportunities which would provide greatest value to local communities and the wider play network. This ensures targeted investment and minimised impact on the climate and environment.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. SMEs within Auckland Council worked collaboratively on the review of the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021).

22. The resulting addendum to the Puketāpapa Play Network Gap Analysis (2021) will assist Parks & Community Facilities to strategically plan future OPEX and CAPEX work programmes.

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

Local impacts and local board views

23. This project aligns directly to objectives within the 2023 Puketāpapa Local Board Plan.

· Our investment in parks, facilities and programmes is focused on growing neighbourhoods, with a focus on Wesley, Waikōwhai and Three Kings suburbs.

· The growing neighborhoods of Roskill, Wesley, Waikōwhai and Three Kings are well planned, built and serviced.

· Our investment in parks and facilities is financially sustainable.

· Te Ao Māori is reflected in our parks and facilities.

· Growth and development can respond to severe weather events and enhances the natural environment.

24. Workshops were held with the local board on 26 February 2024 and 8 August 2024 to present and receive feedback on the draft Play Provision Assessment Revision.

25. Feedback from both workshops has been incorporated into the final draft document.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. Meaningful engagement with mana whenua will be enabled as opportunities from the plan are progressed into feasibility, investigation and design. Iwi will have the opportunity to express interest in the projects and indicate how they would like to be involved.

27. Opportunities for Māori cultural narratives and traditional designs (e.g. Mara Hupara) will be explored during detailed design and delivery.

28. As part of any future development of the play network, mana whenua values relating to Te Aranga Design Principles should be incorporated. These are:

· Rangatiratanga: The right to exercise authority and self-determination within one's own iwi / hapū realm

· Kaitiakitanga: managing and conserving the environment as part of a reciprocal relationship, based on the Māori world view that humans are part of the natural world

· Manaakitanga: the ethic of holistic hospitality whereby Mana Whenua have inherited obligations to be the best hosts they can be

· Wairuatanga: the immutable spiritual connection between people and their environments

· Kotahitanga: unity, cohesion and collaboration

· Whanaungatanga: a relationship through shared experiences and working together which provides people with a sense of belonging

· Mātauranga: Māori / Mana Whenua knowledge and understanding.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. Local board approved investment will be required to initiate projects identified within the assessment. Staff will work with the Puketāpapa Local Board to identify opportunities for funding as part of the future work programmes.

30. Opportunities for collaboration with developers to deliver outcomes from the plan should be explored. This would provide the greatest benefit to new growth communities while working within the current financial constraints.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

31. The investigation and design phase of any candidate project delivery may identify issues that require the feasibility of each opportunity to be reassessed.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The Play Provision Assessment Revision is designed to further refine and set out an updated context for desired play outcomes at a network level. Further information on the projects that will deliver on the identified opportunities will require detailed investigation and community engagement.

33. If recommended outcomes are agreed, staff will work with the local board to identify possible opportunities for funding as part of future Parks & Community Facilities work programmes. The Parks Planning team will continue to support the local board on developer-led initiatives.

34. The proposed Parks & Community Facilities work programme for FY24/25 includes several play space renewal and enhancement projects. Details from this assessment will be used to help inform delivery of these projects.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Play Provision Assessment Revision - V1.0	15

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Brad Congdon - Parks & Places Specialist

Authorisers

Martin van Jaarsveld - Head of Specialist Operations

Nina Siers – Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Expressions of interest applications and granting of a new community lease for the Old Pumphouse building, Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill

File No.: CP2025/00241

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Puketāpapa Local Board to grant a new lease for the Old Pumphouse building located at Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. A new lease was identified and approved by the Puketāpapa Local Board as part of the Customer and Community Services: Community Leases Work Programme 2024/2025 at their 27 June 2024 local board meeting (resolution PKTPP/2024/115).

3. The Puketāpapa Local Board resolved for staff to call for expressions of interest to lease the council-owned building (approximately 264m²) located on Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill.

4. Five applications were received, and an analysis and assessment of these applications was undertaken by staff.

5. All applications were discussed with the Puketāpapa Local Board at a workshop held on
5 December 2024.

6. Staff’s final recommendation is for a new community lease to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated.

7. This allows for maximum use of the site and aligns with the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2023 Outcome, ‘Our community - People can access places and services that cater for their need.’

8. The land occupied by the Old Pumphouse building at Three Kings Reserve is held in fee simple by the Auckland Council and classified as a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

9. Iwi engagement is required and took place in December 2024. No objections have been received.

10. A community outcomes plan will be appended to the lease as a schedule of the lease agreement.

11. This report recommends that a new community lease be granted to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated for a term of five years commencing from 1 April 2025 with one five years right of renewal.

12. If the local board decides to grant the lease, staff will work with the lessees to finalise the lease agreements.

13. The proposed new community lease to the Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated for the building at Three Kings Reserve will be publicly notified prior to the finalization of the lease. The notification will appear in the Central Leader on 27 February 2025 and the Auckland Council website’s Have Your Say webpage with a submission deadline for 26 March 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakaae / grant a new community lease to the Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated (the club) for an area comprising approximately 264m² located at 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill on the land legally described as Section 3 SO 531896 held in title 900461 in fee simple by Auckland Council and classified as a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977 (as per Attachment A – Site Plan), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – five (5) years, commencing 1 April 2025, with one five (5) year right of renewal.

ii) rent – $1300 plus GST per annum.

iii) maintenance fee - $5000 plus GST per annum.

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

b) whakaae / approve all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 and the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 (updated July 2023), and the Auckland Council standard form community lease agreement for a new community lease to the Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated for an area comprising approximately 264m² located at 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill.

c) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that iwi engagement for Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated (the club) at 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill has been undertaken.

d) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that public notification for Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated (the club) at 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill will be undertaken prior to the finalization of the lease.

Horopaki

Context

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

15. The Puketāpapa Local Board approved the Customer and Community Services: Community Leases Work Programme 2024/2025 at their 27 June 2024 local board meeting (resolution PKTPP/2024/115).

16. The new lease at the Old Pumphouse building located at Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill was part of the approved work programme.

17. When a council-owned building becomes vacant, an expression of interest (EoI) process is recommended to engage the community for proposals to ensure the best community outcomes are delivered.

18. The local board directed staff to initiate an EoI for parties interested in occupying the building.

19. Staff advertised and sought applications, including contacting groups on the council interest register as having an interest in land in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

20. Five applications were received. Staff assessed all applications; the results were workshopped with the local board and this report recommend granting a new community lease to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated.

21. Staff recommend offering the community lease to Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated, as this club scored the highest through the assessment analysis process. In addition, Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated proposed use of the site aligns with the outcome of the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan ‘Our community - People can access places and services that cater for their need. Furthermore, Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated require accommodation in the Puketāpapa Local Board area as their members reside within this area and to continue to offer their service.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The land

22. Three Kings Reserve is located at 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill (Attachment A Site Plan). The land, legally described as Section 3 SO 531896 held in title 900461 in fee simple by Auckland Council and classified as a recreation reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

The building

Figure 1. Site plan: Old Pumphouse building, Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill

23. The Old Pumphouse building is situated at Three Kings Reserve, Mount Roskill. The building is owned by council and is approximately 264 sqm in area.

24. The building comprises of one large open space (hall), two toilets, kitchenette, a storage room and deck.

25. The building is in good condition as it has been recently refurbished. Renovations completed include newly fitted carpets, paint work, new LED lights, new kitchen cabinets were fitted, and the exterior roof was painted.

Expressions of Interest process

26. At the expressions of interest closing date, five applications had been received. The five applicants were:

a) Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated

b) Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust

c) New Zealand Kannada Koota Incorporated

d) Asian Community Engagement Trust

e) National Zakat Foundation New Zealand.

27. The applications were assessed using a weighting table to rate a range of criteria including:

· Eligibility – is membership open or restricted.

· Financial stability – did the group provide accounts, were the accounts audited, is the group reliant on council funding, is the group affiliated to a regional/national body.

· Group sustainability – is the group fully self-supporting or do they require greater outside support.

· References – do the groups have supporting references?

· Building size, configuration, location – does the building meet the needs of the group, are any modifications required.

· Extent of usage – the hours per week the facility will be utilized.

· Sharing and collaboration – who are the group willing to share and collaborate with.

· Activity complies with land status – does the activities align with the classification of the land.

· Any requirements for resource and building consents.

· Is there any identified need in the community for this service.

· Do the group’s outcomes align with the local board plan and Auckland Plan?

28. After assessment of the applications staff presented their findings to the local board at a workshop on 5 December 2024. The highest scoring applicant was Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated. In addition, the club can demonstrate its ability to deliver on local board outcomes to the community. The club provides a valuable service to the community by providing services and programmes for increasing participation in active recreation.

Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated

29. Since the establishment of Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated (club) in 1984, the club has provided a variety of karate-related activities to the local area. The club’s reason for applying for the expression of interest at the Old Pumphouse building is to make the benefits of karate available to as many people as possible, regardless of their physical, social or economic status.

30. The club will use the building for 60 hours per week. The main services and programmes that the club will provide is:

a) Seido karate.

b) Special clinics and focus sessions aimed at marginalised communities. Examples include bi-annual women/non-binary clinics, an annual childrens’ and young people clinic, and various ad-hoc intro sessions for other communities.

c) Sessions with refugee and migrant communities, rainbow organisations and others.

d) A master’s programme for new participants over the age of 50.

31. The club’s vision is to be able to provide more free memberships, and lower overall fees to the general membership so people who are not struggling, but are not economically secure, can access this service.

32. The activities and services provide a local community benefit through:

· social inclusion and well-being, community empowerment and capacity building, cultural preservation and promotion, youth and children development, community safety and resilience, environmental sustainability.

33. The services and activities will support and create other activities with the park:

· collaborative programming, shared resources and spaces, cross-promotion and marketing, complementary services, community engagement and participation and integrated programming.

34. The club has 175 members. Membership fees are as follows:

· student/unwaged: $580 per year or $145 per quarter for automated payment

· additional child: $320 per year or $80 per quarter for automated payment

· adult: $740 per year or $185 per quarter for automated payment

· family: $1500 per year or $375 per quarter for automated payment.

35. Approximately 90 per cent of the club’s members reside in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

36. Club membership has been steady since COVID-19, reflecting interest and support from the community.

37. The club is funded by membership fees and operational grants.

38. The club has not received any funding from Auckland Council and is financially buoyant.

39. The club is willing to share the building with other groups.

Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust

40. Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust (the trust) is a charitable organisation established in 2020 to address a critical gap in services for individuals grappling with vision loss. The purpose of the organisation is to provide comprehensive, tailored support for individuals navigating vision loss, particularly those from under-served communities (Māori/Pasifika/other ethnic minorities).

41. The trust will use the building for 30 hours per week. The main services and programmes that the club will provide is:

· Orientation and Mobility Training

· Low Vision Adaptation

· Assistive Technology Training

· Independent Life Skills

· Diabetes Lifestyle Program

· Free Eye Exams

· Diabetes Meal Subscription Program (D.Box Program).

42. The trust aims to inform, advocate, educate and train people who are in need, those with vision loss or blindness and those others with injuries/disability; to promote quality of health and life and enable community participation, employment or career development and maximum independence. With particular focus on under-served communities in Auckland, such as Māori and Pasifika, as these communities face significant health inequities and have the greatest need for affordable and culturally responsive health services.

43. The activities and services provide a local community benefit through:

44. The services and activities will support and create other activities within the park such as:

· collaborative programming, shared resources and spaces, cross-promotion and marketing, complementary services, community engagement and participation, and integrated programming.

45. The trust has 68 members and does not charge a membership fee.

46. The trust state that their membership is growing.

47. The trust is funded by grants, donations, koha, revenue from services and sales, and fundraising.

48. The trust has not received any funding from Auckland Council and is financially buoyant.

49. The trust is willing to share the building with communities who hold health and wellness workshops, diabetes management classes, and adaptive fitness sessions, disability support groups, environmental organizations, and cultural groups.

New Zealand Kannada Koota Incorporated

50. New Zealand Kannada Koota Incorporated (group) is an incorporated society established in 1996 as an immigrant community organisation which strives to unite Kannadigas under one roof to promote the culture and languages of Karnataka state of India.

51. The group will use the building for 45 hours per week. The main services and programmes that the group will provide are:

· to liaise and cooperate with other communities and societies in New Zealand and in India. eg. Use the facility for preparatory work for sanitary pads for supplying low-cost sanitary pads. Mentoring children to benefit in their social and personal development.

· to promote friendship and respect between members of the Koota and the people of New Zealand by sharing the facility as and when required by other groups/associations.

· to conduct language classes for younger generations and interested members to promote, foster and maintain the cultural and linguistic heritage of Karnataka among the Koota members.

· practice for cultural activities and participate in annual programs to keep alive and promote customs, traditions, and culture of Karnataka and India.

· provide necessary services (JP service), conduct workshops for family benefits (first home buyers, investors, etc.), conduct training for personal development.

· meetings: executive committee meetings, senior citizens meetings, women's group meetings/activities, and assistance to new immigrants by networking and other support.

52. The group aims to promote, preserve, and maintain the cultural and linguistic heritage of Karnataka and from India through:

· promoting friendship and respect between members of New Zealand Kannada Koota (hereinafter referred to as NZKK) and the people of New Zealand.

· keep alive and promote customs, traditions and culture of Karnataka and India amongst NZKK members and inculcate these among the younger generation of NZKK.

· assist new immigrants (especially from Karnataka) to adapt to a new culture and settle into New Zealand.

· promote and liaise mutual support, joint action and cooperation with other communities and societies in New Zealand.

· provide interested people and organizations with the information about the Karnataka people and culture.

· enrich the diverse cultural mosaic of New Zealand with the best of Indian traditions.

53. The activities and services provide local community benefit through:

54. The services and activities will support and create other activities within the park:

· collaborative programming, shared resources and spaces, cross-promotion and marketing, complementary services, community engagement and participation, and integrated programming.

55. The group has 750 members. The membership fees are as follows:

· Individuals: $50 per year

· Families: $120 per year

56. The group state that their membership is growing year on year.

57. The group is funded by membership fees, sponsorships and fundraising.

58. The group has not received any funding from Auckland Council and is financially sound.

59. The group is willing to share the building with communities.

Asian Community Engagement Trust

60. Asian Community Engagement Trust (ACET) is a charitable trust established in 2020 with the mission of fostering a sense of belonging among Asian migrants through good interactions, assisting recent Asian migrants in making New Zealand their home, and actively engaging in and contributing to the local community.

61. ACET will use the building for 60 hours per week. The main services and programmes that ACET will provide are:

· relieve poverty through access to advice, support, and assistance, to recent immigrants to New Zealand, without limitation:

· counselling services.

· health information, including assisting people to access social services, and

· health services, including mental health services.

· assisting with obtaining sustainable employment.

· assistance with obtaining public housing.

· mediations for family conflicts.

· creating social networks; and

· providing assistance and support for other family members who provide care for such persons.

· guidance services aimed at enabling Asian immigrants to settle faster and take up their responsibilities as part of the New Zealand society and so eliminate the possibility of Asian immigrant families being dependent on government social assistance.

62. ACET aims to connect, inspire, and empower Asian immigrants with the knowledge, skills, and confidence they need to establish a sense of belonging in New Zealand, while preserving their cultural identity and fully participating in and contributing to the community's sustainable development.

63. The activities and services provide local community benefit through:

· Social inclusion and well-being, community empowerment and capacity building, cultural preservation and promotion, youth and children development, community safety and resilience, and environmental sustainability.

64. The services and activities will support and create other activities within the park:

· collaborative programming, shared resources and spaces, cross-promotion and marketing, complementary services, community engagement and participation and integrated programming.

65. ACET has 800 members and does not charge a membership fee.

66. ACET is funded by donations, community grants, crown grants, fundraising and sponsorships.

67. ACET has received multiple funding from Auckland Council for events and is financially sound.

68. ACET is not willing to share the building.

National Zakat Foundation New Zealand

69. National Zakat Foundation New Zealand (NZFNZ) is a charitable trust that was established in 2021 to empower the Muslim community by collecting and distributing zakat within the country.

70. NZFNZ will use the building for 100 hours per week. The main services and programmes that NZFNZ will provide is:

· zakat collections from local Muslims and distributes it to eligible recipients (as defined by Islamic law) within the local community. It offers support to individuals facing financial hardship, refugees, single parents, and the unemployed.

· running a hardship fund aimed at providing financial aid for emergency situations, covering essential needs such as rent, utilities, and food.

· promoting zakat literacy through seminars, workshops, and online resources.

· providing guidance on calculating and paying zakat correctly, including practical tools like online zakat calculators.

· engaging in various initiatives, including Ramadan campaigns, food drives, and Eid projects. It builds partnerships with mosques and Islamic centers to identify and reach eligible recipients more effectively.

· providing tailored support through caseworkers who assess individual needs and connect recipients with appropriate services or financial assistance.

71. NZFNZ aims to collect compulsory giving (‘zakat’) from the Muslim population of New Zealand and utilise the zakat collected to help the poor and needy and to run a proper charitable organisation that will assist people to give zakat and allow for the administration of this zakat to be used through a proper channel to benefit the poor and needy.

72. The activities and services provide local community benefit through:

73. The services and activities will support and create other activities with the park:

· collaborative programming, shared resources and spaces, cross-promotion and marketing, complementary services, community engagement and participation and integrated programming.

74. NZFNZ has 700 members and does not charge a membership fee.

75. NZFNZ is funded by donations from individuals and businesses.

76. NZFNZ has not received funding from Auckland Council and is financially sound.

77. NZFNZ is willing to share the building and maintains working partnerships with three other organisations, such as the Ummah Trust, Fatimah Foundation and Kāhui Tū Kaha.

Public notification and engagement

78. Public notification is required under the Reserves Act 1977 prior to any lease being granted. Iwi engagement is also required under the terms of section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987 prior to any lease being granted.

79. The proposed new community lease to the Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated for the building at Three Kings Reserve will be publicly notified prior to the finalization of the lease. The notification will appear in the Central Leader on 27 February 2025 and the Auckland Council website’s Have Your Say webpage with a submission deadline for 26 March 2025.

80. The cost of the public notification will be met by the Parks and Community Facilities department of the council.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

81. It is anticipated that activation of the building/park will not result in an increase of greenhouse gas emission. A shared community space will however decrease overall energy use, as users will not consume energy at individual workspaces. The shared space will provide opportunity and enable people to enjoy positive healthy lifestyles and will increase capability and connections within local community.

82. 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.

83. Asset improvements and maintenance undertaken by the council will strive for maximum re-use and recycling of existing material. This will be in alignment with the waste management hierarchy (prevention, reduction, recycle) to ensure minimum impact on greenhouse gas emission.

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

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

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

85. Climate change has a likely potential to impact the lease, as part of the leased area is located in a flood plain zone.

86. The building is on a flood plain and has flooded previously, therefore all applicants were advised that content insurance is required, and groups are to be mindful of the risk when storing items in the building.

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the flood plain and flood prone areas with Three Kings Reserve

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

87. The following council staff have been consulted on the proposal. No objections to the proposed EoI have been received:

· Parks and Places Specialist, Parks and Community Facilities

· Facilities Manager, Parks and Community Facilities

· Manager Area Operations, Parks and Community Facilities

· Community Broker – Puketāpapa, Community Wellbeing

· Sport & Recreation Lead – Active Recreation

· Senior Heritage Assets Advisor – Heritage Information & Advice

88. Healthy Waters has been consulted and recommend that an evacuation route for the building and evacuation plan and no use in heavy rain warnings be implemented.

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

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

Local impacts and local board views

90. The proposed lease will benefit the community by enabling initiatives that promote recreational activities, fitness, and well-being through the practice of traditional martial arts, for all members of the community for the local board area and its surrounding communities.

91. The assessment of the application was discussed with the local board at their workshop on 5 December 2024. The local board indicated its in principle support of the lease proposal.

92. The delivered activities align and support the Puketāpapa Local Board Plan 2023 Outcome ‘Our community - People can access places and services that cater for their need.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

93. Iwi engagement about the council’s intention to grant a new community lease for 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill was undertaken in December 2024 with the iwi groups who are part of Central/West Mana Whenua Forum identified as having an interest in land in the Puketāpapa Local Board area.

94. The engagement involved an email to all iwi identified as having an interest in the area, containing detailed information on the land, the lessee, the lease proposal as per Section 4 of the Conservation Act 1987.

95. 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.

96. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2024-2034, the Unitary Plan (operative in part), individual local board plans and in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework.

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

98. Community leases support a wide range of activities and groups. Leases are awarded based on an understanding of local needs, interests, and priorities. The activities and services provided by leaseholders create benefits for many local communities, including Māori.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

99. All costs relating to the advertisement of the council’s intention for the expression of interest process will be borne by the Parks and Community Facilities department of Auckland Council.

100. Staff have consulted with the Financial Strategy and Planning department of the council. No concerns were raised regarding the financial implications for the proposed new lease.

101. Ongoing maintenance of the asset will be covered by the council which is accounted for in current and future budgets. An annual maintenance fee of $5000.00 (plus GST) is charged to the group towards maintenance of the building. This covers building insurance, maintenance, and compliance costs. The tenant group pays the electricity and water charges for the building.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

102. Should the local board resolve not to grant the proposed community lease for the Old Pumphouse building at Three Kings Reserve, 1011 Mount Eden Road, Mount Roskill, the ability of Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated to undertake all their current and future activities will be negatively impacted. This will have an adverse impact on the achievement of the desired local board plan outcome.

103. Should the building become unoccupied, there is a risk associated with the lack of maintenance and possible improvements. Council will be liable for the assets regardless of whether budget is allocated to or identified for renewals.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

104. If the local board resolves to the grant the proposed new community lease, staff will work with the Auckland Seido Karate Club Incorporated to finalise a lease agreement in accordance with the local board’s decision after public notification has been completed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site Plan	47

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Malinda Naidoo - Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business

Nina Siers – Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Local Board Transport Capital Fund Projects 2025-2026

File No.: CP2025/01304

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. The purpose of this report is to seek authorisation from Puketāpapa Local Board to allocate new approved funding of $632,344 which includes cost savings from their current active projects for its Local Board Transport Capital Fund for the 2025-2026 Financial Year to new projects for investigation and delivery, and to top up any existing projects which require additional funding.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its workshop on 28 November 2024, Auckland Transport informed the local board that it had been allocated additional funding after the finalisation of the 2024-2025 Regional Land Transport Plan. Together with savings from currently active projects, the local board has additional funds of $632,344 to allocate to new projects and active projects which require additional funding.

3. Auckland Transport workshopped options with the local board on 28 November 2024, at which the local board expressed their preference for Auckland Transport’s recommendations be presented to their next business meeting, for a final decision on their preferred options. The recommendations and options were presented as shown in Attachment A to this report. This report seeks formal endorsement of the preferred options.

4. The local board was presented with a list of candidate projects at the 28 November 2024 workshop together with the indicative costs of the projects (Attachment A). The local board is now invited to allocate funding to any of these projects.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) allocate $400,000 to the Dominion Road Mid-block crossing

b) allocate $232,344 to the Athenic Avenue crossing facility for Halsey Drive School.

c) approve as its first priority, that any cost savings from its currently active local board transport capital fund projects and/or any new additional funding that becomes available be applied to its active projects if they require additional funding to complete within the current 3-year local board programme.

d) approve as its second priority, that any further cost savings from the completion of its currently active local board transport capital fund projects and/or any new additional funding that becomes available, be applied to these projects in a priority order:

i) Wayfinding signage $100,000

ii) Beagle Avenue table upgrade to zebra $150,000

Horopaki

Context

5. Auckland Transport manages Auckland’s transport network on behalf of Auckland Council. Auckland Transport’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 Auckland Transport work together to set ‘levels of engagement’ for projects and programmes that Auckland Transport is delivering. This process clearly defines the board’s expectations and Auckland Transport’s responsibilities.

6. 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 - Auckland Transport 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. The engagement level for the local board transport capital projects is Collaborate.

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

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

7. The Local Board Transport Capital Fund (LBTCF) is an Auckland Transport fund established in 2012 to allow local boards to deliver small projects in their local area that would not normally be prioritised by Auckland Transport. Since 2020, when COVID 19 lockdowns impacted on Auckland Council’s revenue the LBTCF has been reduced.

8. Last year, the total budget for all local boards was reduced from the indicative budget of $45m to $29.5m for the 3-year term. After the finalisation of the 2024-2034 Regional Land Transport Plan, this budget was increased to $48.7m of which $17m is approved for the current FY2025 and $20.4m is endorsed for FY2026.

9. Therefore, the indicative budget for Puketāpapa Local Board has been increased from $1,016,000 to $1,498,772 for the 3-year term. The local board has allocated a portion of this budget to projects already and these projects have either been constructed or are now construction ready.

10. With cost savings from the currently active projects of $149,572, there is an indicative budget of $632,344 now available to the local board for to allocate to new projects or to top up current projects where required.

11. Through this report, Auckland Transport is giving the local board an opportunity to allocate funds to new projects as discussed with the local board at the 28 November 2024 workshop and indicatively costed (Attachment A).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Active projects

12. The following table recaps the status of current active projects in the programme:

Table 1 – Update on active projects

Projects	Resolved Budget + AT Approved budget	Project Status	Cost Savings	Funding required to be resolved to complete the project
Melrose Road Pedestrian refuge	$135,000.00	Completed	-	-
Hillsborough Road / Mt Albert Road intersection	$295,000.00	Completed	$24,278.23	-
Hillsborough Road Crossing Point	$46,000	Completed	$50,294.06	-
Richardson Road Bus stop upgrades	$120,000	External consultation	-	-
Frost Road shared path extension to Mt Albert Road	$419,611	Completed	$75,000	-
		Total	$149,572.29

19. On 28 November 2024 Auckland Transport staff provided advice to the local board about the progress of current active projects.

20. Local Board Transport Capital Fund projects are at a ‘Collaborate’ level of engagement, so require the board to authorise the proposed plans and additional budget required.

New LBTCF Budget

21. Auckland Transport attended a workshop with the local board on 28 November 2024. At this workshop, Auckland Transport confirmed that through the 2024-2034 Regional Land Transport Plan process, additional budget was now available for the board to allocate to new LBTCF projects.

22. With this new budget and savings from current active projects, the local board now has an indicative budget of $632,344.

23. At the workshop, Auckland Transport presented a number of candidate projects with indicative costing for the local board to consider for funding (See Attachment A).

24. After discussion, the local board indicated that Auckland Transport recommendations and project options be presented to their next business meeting to finalise their preferred options. The recommended options from Auckland Transport lay with the projects in the following table:

Project Name	Project Description	High level cost estimate
Dominion Road Mid- block crossing	This request is to provide a new pedestrian crossing facility on Dominion Road as there is no formalised crossing points for pedestrians for this long stretch of Dominion Road between Keystone Avenue and Landscape Road approximately 800m. There are a couple of refuge islands in between these two roads. Do pedestrian surveys to determine the pedestrian demand and desire lines. The cost estimate of $400k is based on the proposal of a new mid-block signalised pedestrian crossing. “There is 1.4km with no formalised crossing. High pedestrian counts near the shops at Kings Road as well as Louvain Ave”	$400,000

Athenic Avenue crossing facility for Halsey Drive School	Halsey Drive School requested this new crossing facility for their back entrance to the school to improve the safety of students crossing the road. The scope of the project is to provide a new at grade zebra crossing.	$232,344
Total required		$632,344

25.Other projects considered:

Project Name	Project Description	High level cost estimate
Wayfinding signage	The local board is requesting for new Wayfinding signage, to improve walkability within the Puketapapa Local Board area, and request that Auckland Transport work with the local board to establish routes.	$100,000 (approximately)
Mt Roskill Traffic Calming Area smaller project	Constituent concerned about Melrose Road/Olsen Avenue intersection and Littlejohn Street/Olsen Avenue intersection (response to constituent query advised 3 reported crashes in 5 years for Melrose Road/Olsen Avenue and 1 crash in 5 years for Littlejohn Street/Olsen Avenue). Local Board members also expressed their concerns. UPDATE: Please note there is a Melrose Road/Olsen Avenue AT project that is being investigated. Existing route treatment of side islands with red carpet. New proposal to provide side islands with red-carpet slow marking -1 Littlejohn Street, 1 Olsen Avenue (to the south of Littlejohn intersection), 1 North of Melrose Road/Olsen Avenue intersection.	$100,000
Beagle Avenue table upgrade to zebra	The local board has requested for an actual marked crossing – currently there is a raised bump (courtesy crossing) on Beagle Avenue. The scope of the project is to upgrade the existing raised table to a formalised zebra crossing.	$150,000
Total required		$350,000

26. The Puketāpapa Local Board is invited to allocate funding to any of the above projects.

27. The Puketāpapa Local Board may wish to consider funding the projects in the above table from a future funding allocation in the next political term.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28. Auckland Transport 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.

29. Auckland Transport reviews the potential climate impacts of all projects and works hard to minimise carbon emissions. Auckland Transport’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

30. The Local Board Transport Capital projects noted for decision do not impact on Council facilities.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. The Local Board Transport Capital projects were workshopped with members prior to this report being submitted. At the 28 November 2024 workshop, local board indicated that Auckland Transport prepare a business report of their recommendations and project options for their next business meeting at which time the local board will finalise their preferred options for the use of their Local Board Transport Capital Fund.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. 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.

33. Auckland Transport’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

34. 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

35. The local board transport capital project decisions in this report do have financial implications adding to the Local Board Transport Capital Fund by $632,344.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

36. 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.

37. The costs outlined in Attachment A are indicative costings and selected projects may cost more or less than the amount indicated. Once projects are selected, further investigation will confirm project costings.

38. Auckland Transport 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

39. The following activities or actions are planned:

If the Puketāpapa Local Board resolves to support new projects with its additional funds, Auckland Transport will begin investigation and initial design and report back to the local board.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Transport Capital Fund Workshop Presentation	55

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jennifer Fraser – Elected Member Relationship Partner, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

John Gillespie – Head of Stakeholder and Community Engagement, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

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

File No.: CP2025/00651

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 Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the Puketāpapa 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 unable 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 - Puketāpapa-2412 Attachment A to Kōkiri Quarterly Update December provides an update on all projects and programmes currently listed in this local board’s Kōkiri Agreement 2024-2025.

12. Attachment B - Puketāpapa-2412 Attachment B to Kōkiri Quarterly Maintenance and Renewals Update December is a quarterly update on road maintenance activities that will be tabled at the meeting.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

14. 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.

15. 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

16. 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.”

17. 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.

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

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

20. 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

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

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

22. 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.

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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.

26. 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

27. 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.

28. 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

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

30. The next quarterly report is planned for March 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Kōkiri Quarterly Update December 2024	77
b ⇩	Puketāpapa Local Board Kōkiri Quarterly Maintenance and Renewals Update December 2024	83

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Ben Stallworthy – Principal Advisor, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

John Gillespie – Head of Stakeholder and Community Engagement, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Public feedback report on the traffic bylaw review

File No.: CP2025/01334

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive local board views on how the Joint Bylaw Panel should address public feedback on the proposed Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025 and its supporting proposals.

2. To recommend delegating a member to represent these views to the Joint Bylaw Panel.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

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

4. The current rules are set out in several documents:

· Auckland Transport Traffic Bylaw 2012

· Auckland Council’s Traffic Bylaw 2015

· Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 (covering use of vehicles on beaches).

5. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council are conducting a review of these bylaws to identify efficiencies and possible improvements.

6. The proposed new Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including changes to some topics in the proposed new bylaw and changes to rules in other bylaws (referred to as the “supporting proposals”), is provided as Attachment A of the agenda report.

7. In August and September 2024 (page 391), all local boards provided feedback on the draft options and draft recommendations. Local boards generally supported the recommended option for each topic and provided feedback on some topics such as berm parking and parking on beaches. Staff considered the local board feedback in drafting the proposals which went out for public consultation.

8. Public consultation on the proposals took place from Monday 4 November to Monday 4 December 2024 (inclusive) and public hearings were held on 6 December 2024.

9. This report seeks the local board views on how the Joint Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback (included as Attachment B of the agenda report) to the proposed new bylaw and supporting proposals. This report also recommends delegating a local board member to present these views to the panel.

10. The bylaw panel deliberation is scheduled for 2 May 2025. This is where the panel will discuss and deliberate on the public feedback and local board and mana whenua views. Local boards can delegate a representative to speak at the hearings if desired.

11. The Auckland Transport Board and the Auckland Council Governing Body will make a final decision on the proposals in June 2025 based on the recommendations from the bylaw panel.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakarite / provide views on how the Joint Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback on the proposed Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including the supporting proposals, included as Attachment B to this report

b) tāpae / delegate Member(s) XXX to represent these views to the Joint Bylaw Panel.

Horopaki

Context

Traffic bylaws

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

13. 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

Covers 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

Covers 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

Covers use of vehicles on beaches.

14. 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.

15. The bylaws establish a framework for regulating vehicle use, traffic and parking on Auckland’s transport system and on council-controlled land. For example, they enable the creation of bus lanes, but the specific locations are determined later through resolutions. This approach allows for flexibility to address changing location-specific needs over time.

16. Some bylaw provisions are not site-specific. These apply when Auckland Transport requires consistent rules across all locations, without the need for site-specific resolutions, for example, prohibiting abandoned vehicles on roads or in public places.

Reviewing Auckland’s traffic bylaws

17. Auckland Transport and Auckland Council are conducting a joint review of Auckland’s traffic-related bylaws to ensure they continue to meet the needs of Aucklanders. This review considered legislative and technological changes, as well as expert feedback on ways to improve bylaw effectiveness.

18. The Regulatory and Community Safety Committee on 2 July 2024 endorsed the findings report and requested an options report and proposal (resolution number RCSC/2024/48).

19. In August and September 2024, all local boards provided feedback on the draft options and draft recommendations. Local boards generally supported the recommended option for each topic and provided feedback on some topics such as berm parking and parking on beaches. Some feedback focused on operational, public consultation or non-bylaw related matters and were referred to the relevant teams where appropriate.

20. Following this, a draft Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including the supporting proposals, was developed for public consultation.

21. The Regulatory and Community Safety Committee and the AT Design and Delivery Committee endorsed the draft proposals and public consultation on 8 October 2024.

22. The Auckland Council Governing Body and the Auckland Transport Board adopted the statement of proposal and approved the conduct of public consultation on 24 October 2024 and 29 October 2024, respectively.

23. Public consultation took place from Monday 4 November to Monday 4 December 2024 (inclusive). Public hearings were held on 6 December 2024 at 20 Viaduct Harbour Avenue, Auckland. A total of 196 submissions were received: 181 through the online survey, 13 via mail and email and two verbal submissions. Public feedback is included in this report as Attachment B of the agenda report.

24. This report seeks the local board views on how the Joint Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback on the proposed Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including the supporting proposals (refer to Attachment A of the agenda report).

25. The final views from local boards will guide the bylaw panel during the deliberations on 2 May 2025. Local boards also have the option of sending a representative to share their views in person.

26. The Auckland Transport Board and the Auckland Council Governing Body will make a final decision on the bylaw proposals in June 2025 based on the recommendations from the bylaw panel.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

27. Auckland Transport subject matter experts met with and discussed the traffic bylaw review with the Puketāpapa Local Board at a workshop on 22 August 2024.

28. Before that workshop, Auckland Transport and Auckland Council staff reviewed the bylaws across 18 different topics to identify if there were problems, whether the bylaws helped address those problems, and if there were any alternatives or improvements.

29. The Auckland Transport Board and Auckland Council Governing Body adopted the Statement of Proposal and approved the material for public consultation. The finalised proposals included:

a) creating a new joint AT and AC Te Ture ā-Rohe mō te Whakamahinga me te Whakatūnga Waka 2025 | Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw to combine the Auckland Transport Traffic Bylaw 2012, Auckland Council Traffic Bylaw 2015 and clause 16 of the Auckland Council Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 (main proposal).

b) making supporting changes (supporting proposals) by clarifying and improving the following six topics in the proposed new joint bylaw

· launching of boats on beaches and obtaining beach driving permits

· regulations for heavy vehicles

· parking vehicles off a roadway

· busways, busway stations, and park & rides

· resident parking

· temporary traffic and parking rules for special events.

c) moving (or removing) the following seven rules from the current bylaws:

· establishing shared zones, parking zones, parking places, and transport stations

· setting new speed limits on council-controlled land

· parking for display or sale

· broken down vehicles on a road or public place

· leaving machinery or goods on a road or public place

· repairing or modifying vehicles on a road in in a public place

· priority on cycle paths or shared paths.

d) clarifying and improving other rules in the AC and AT Signs Bylaw 2022, AT Activities in the Road Corridor Bylaw 2022, and AC Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 that relate to certain activities involving vehicles.

30. The key insights from public consultation are as follows:

a) The proposals were well received by the public. The main proposal was largely supported, with 83 per cent of respondents expressing no concerns. Most respondents had no comments or concerns about the supporting proposals.

b) Parking vehicles off the roadway received the most attention, with 35 per cent of respondents overall commenting on the topic. Most people who provided comments (88 per cent) expressed support for changes to reduce parking on berms. Those who raised concerns with the topic (10 per cent) frequently mentioned the need for berm parking, especially where limited on-street parking is available.

c) New heavy traffic parking regulations were also largely supported by submitters (79 per cent of those who commented on the topic). There were some concerns from the industry perspective, specifically about rest breaks or overnight spaces for drivers to sleep, particularly for out-of-town companies.

d) The only topic that was not supported was the proposal to remove user priority on cycle paths and shared paths. Respondents requested that it remains in Auckland’s traffic bylaws as it aims to protect vulnerable road users, particularly people travelling on foot and bicycle.

e) Community concerns about the topic of repairing or modifying vehicles in public spaces are centred around its enforcement – respondents wanted assurance that people experiencing an emergency would not be fined.

31. The draft Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including the supporting proposals, will be reviewed and deliberated by the Joint Bylaw Panel in May 2025.

32. Local boards are encouraged to speak in front of the panel. Local boards can delegate a representative to speak at the hearings through this report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

33. 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.

34. During the development of the bylaws, climate impacts were considered because effective bylaws are tools that help 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.

35. 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

36. This review was conducted jointly by Auckland Transport and Auckland Council.

37. Relevant staff from several council operational units impacted have also participated in the review findings and improvements addressed in the options report and proposal. These staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role. This includes Regional Parks, Parks and Community Facilities, Compliance Response and Investigations, Waste Solutions, Event Facilitation, Regional Operations, Active Communities, Connected Communities, and Growth, Transport and Infrastructure Strategy units.

38. All units were in favour of combining the traffic-related bylaws into a new joint bylaw.

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

Local impacts and local board views

39. The local board was briefed on the review on 22 August 2025 providing an opportunity to receive quality advice about the review and its finding. The response from both elected members and staff supporting local boards was positive about the review.

40. Local boards generally supported the recommended options and provided feedback on topics like berm and beach parking. Operational, consultation, or non-bylaw matters were referred to relevant teams as needed.

41. AT and AC staff considered the local board feedback in drafting the proposals which went out for public consultation.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

42. AT and AC are committed to meeting the responsibilities under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its broader legal obligations in being more responsible or effective to Māori.

43. AT’s Māori Responsiveness Plan outlines the commitment to 19 mana whenua iwi 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

44. Using this framework for discussion, AT 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.

45. 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

46. This decision has no financial implications for the local board as Auckland Transport funds all its projects and programmes.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

47. 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

48. The Joint Bylaw Panel will review and deliberate all submissions about the draft proposed Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including the supporting proposals, in May 2025. Prior to the deliberations, local boards are encouraged to speak to the panel.

49. The Auckland Transport Board and Auckland Council Governing Body will deliberate on the Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025, including supporting proposals. If adopted, it will come into effect in July 2025. The AT Board will adopt provisions for the transport system, while the AC Governing Body will adopt those for council-controlled land.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Draft Vehicle Use and Parking Bylaw 2025 and the supporting proposals	91
b ⇩	Local board summary of public feedback	117

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Joemier Pontawe – Principal Policy Advisor, Auckland Transport

Authorisers

Ben Stallworthy – Principal Advisor Strategic Relations, Auckland Transport

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Local Board feedback on Fix and Finish fund

File No.: CP2025/00812

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback from local boards on the implementation of the $20 million Fix and Finish fund, to input into Governing Body decision making.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Governing Body adopted the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 which includes a proposal of a $20 million reserve fund, the “Fix and Finish” fund, to complete community projects.

3. This fund was subject to the creation of the Auckland Future Fund and achieving enhanced returns for the 2024/2025 financial year.

4. In October 2024, a memo was distributed to elected members with initial staff advice and input from the Mayoral Office on how the Fix and Finish fund could work, including draft processes, criteria and options for funding distributions.

5. This report seeks local board feedback on aspects relating to the fund’s implementation.

6. A report will be presented to the Governing Body in March 2025 to seek final decisions including the methodology for distributing the Fix and Finish fund to local boards.

7. Local board feedback will be collated and included as an attachment to the report to the Governing Body in March 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) whakarite/provide feedback on the criteria for eligible projects for the Fix and Finish fund.

b) whakarite/provide feedback on preferred funding allocation model for the Fix and Finish fund.

c) whakarite/provide feedback on any other matters relating to the Fix and Finish fund.

Horopaki

Context

8. In the final Mayoral Proposal for the Long-term Plan 2024-2034 (LTP), the mayor proposed a $20 million reserve fund to “fix and finish” community projects in certain legacy areas.

9. The Governing Body’s resolution (GB/2024/45) for the adoption of the LTP included a clause for $20 million of enhanced returns relating to the Auckland Future Fund to be set aside in a reserve fund to fix and finish community projects in the legacy Manukau City and Auckland City areas.

10. On 24 October 2024, an update memo from finance staff (Attachment A) was distributed to the Governing Body and all elected members on a draft process and criteria, ahead of further engagement with affected local board chairs and ward councillors.

11. This memo confirmed the purpose of the Fix and Finish fund as set out by the Mayor’s Office:

“to provide capex funding to priority projects within the legacy Auckland City and Manukau City Council areas that provide a direct benefit to local communities and residents. Funding must go towards projects that are already in the pipeline and may not have full funding.”

12. There are 13 local boards partially or wholly in the legacy Auckland City and Manukau City Council boundaries. These are: Waitematā, Ōrākei, Albert-Eden, Puketāpapa, Whau, Waiheke, Aotea/Great Barrier, Maungakiekie-Tāmaki, Howick, Ōtara-Papatoetoe, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, Manurewa and Franklin.

13. The next steps in Attachment A identified seeking informal local board feedback through the local board chairs, however subsequently staff considered a formal resolution to be more appropriate for this matter.

14. Staff provided a briefing for local board members, local board chairs and ward councillors for the 13 local board areas in December 2024.

15. This report seeks formal local board feedback on matters relating to the Fix and Finish fund, which will be collated and attached to the report for the Governing Body in March 2025.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

16. Staff referred to the original intent outlined in the Mayor's Proposal and final budget proposal and Governing Body resolution, and input from the Mayor’s Office, in developing the project eligibility criteria for the Fix and Finish fund. Key principles included finishing community projects, focusing on larger priority projects, taking a regional approach, value for ratepayers and simplicity.

Project eligibility criteria

17. The eligibility criteria are as follows:

· project is within legacy Auckland City or Manukau City boundaries

· must be a local board project

· community project (limited to community services activity)

· renewals (fix), or projects which have undergone planning and are ready to deliver with funding (finish)

· identified as a priority in the Local Board Plan 2023

· greater than $1 million in value, and with an appropriate level of business case assessment

· local board can fully fund the project including ongoing operational costs

· is not fully funded in the latest work programme due to funding constraints, or is funded in future years of the work programme and can be brought forward

· could include unfunded standalone stages of a multi-stage project.

18. Staff also recommend that to ensure effective use of the reserve funding, further considerations would include:

· ensuring the project can commence physical delivery within the next three years, and

· noting that local boards can jointly fund a project, agreeing to share any consequential operational costs, for wider community benefit

· alignment with council’s strategic direction for investment.

19. An exception may be required for the greater than $1 million in value criteria, should a local board be allocated funding at a level significantly below the $1 million threshold.

Funding allocation methodologies

20. Three funding allocation methodologies have been developed and modelled for the distribution of the Fix and Finish fund to local boards (refer to attachment B):

· equitable distribution (based on the local board equitable funding formula)

· straight split distribution (where all local boards get the same amount)

· contestable fund (where funding is allocated to prioritised projects rather than to local boards)

Straight split

21. The straight split distribution model is a simple calculation which allocates each local board an equal share of the $20 million.

22. However, this method is inequitable and does not provide an advantage to achieving the intended purpose or outcome of the fund over other methodologies, therefore staff do not recommend the use of this funding allocation method.

Equitable

23. The equitable distribution model uses a weighting of 80% population, 15% deprivation and 5% land area, with the exception of Aotea/Great Barrier and Waiheke local boards allocated at 1% and 2% of the total fund. This is consistent with the recently adopted Fairer Funding model for local boards, and the Local Board Funding Policy 2025, although only for 13 local boards.

24. With this model each local board is allocated a share of the $20 million, and the local board will decide on the projects and amounts to allocate through adopting their capital work programmes. Projects funded must still meet the eligibility criteria for the Fix and Finish fund.

25. This model supports empowered local board decision making and is consistent with an equitable funding approach for local boards.

26. There is a risk of funding being unallocated to projects should there be no eligible projects within a local board area, and delays may result in a reduction in purchasing power.

27. The underlying statistics used for the equitable distribution is consistent with those used for Fairer Funding at the time of preparing the LTP 2024-2034.

28. For Franklin and Whau local boards, only the areas within the boundaries of legacy Auckland City and Manukau City were included for the purposes of the equitable calculation.

Contestable

29. A contestable distribution method can also be used which would result in local board projects being submitted and funding prioritised to projects with the highest assessed benefits.

30. With this model, local boards would apply by submitting their eligible projects to the reserve fund decision maker by a set date. Projects would be assessed against pre-determined prioritisation criteria that would deliver the highest benefits. The decision maker would then resolve on the funding allocation to the individual projects.

31. The benefit of this model is that a much larger funding amount can be allocated to a single project, allowing the completion of a much larger community project.

32. Further work would need to be done to develop prioritisation assessment criteria that competing local board projects could be assessed against to support decision making.

33. Final project allocation decisions could be made by the Governing Body or delegated to a committee comprised of relevant ward councillors and/or local board chairs.

34. There is a risk should the $20 million fund be oversubscribed, a prioritisation exercise and decision process may result in a longer timeframe to allocate funding to projects.

Ongoing monitoring and reporting

35. Progress of these projects will be reported through ongoing quarterly monitoring at the local board level via the local board work programme.

36. Six monthly monitoring and reporting of the overall fund and the allocation of funding to local boards will be provided to the Governing Body.

37. The fund will be planned and reported as a reserve on the council’s balance sheet, and included in the council’s Annual Plan/Long-term Plan/Annual Report.

Other matters

38. As this funding relates to only 13 local boards and was approved by the Governing Body through Long-term Plan decisions, staff recommend this funding be treated as discrete funding to specific local boards, regardless of the funding allocation model decided by the Governing Body.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

39. The recommendations in this report have no particular impacts on climate.

40. The projects to be completed using the Fix and Finish fund may have project-specific climate impacts. If a contestable approach were taken then this could be included in the prioritisation assessment criteria.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

41. The recommendations in this report do not impact the council group as the fund is restricted to community projects linked to the community services activity.

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

Local impacts and local board views

42. The purpose of the Fix and Finish fund is to provide capital funding which will enable local boards to fix and finish community projects in the legacy Auckland City and Manukau City Council areas that provide a direct benefit to local communities and residents.

43. It is expected all eligible projects that use this funding will directly benefit local communities and residents.

44. Up to 13 local boards may be eligible for funding from the Fix and Finish fund, and would receive an additional capital funding allocation over and above their existing levels in the Long-term Plan.

45. Staff engaged with local boards in December 2024 through an online briefing. Local boards have been supportive of the existence of this fund and progressing the allocation of the fund.

46. This report is an opportunity for local boards to formally provide their views on implementation of the fund, which will be included with the report for the Governing Body decision on the fund.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

47. The recommendations in this report have no particular impacts on Māori.

48. The projects to be completed using the Fix and Finish Fund may have project-specific impacts for Māori. If a contestable approach were taken then this could be included in the prioritisation assessment criteria.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

49. There are no financial implications relating to the recommendations in this report.

50. The establishment of a Fix and Finish fund remains on track following the sale of council’s remaining AIAL shares at a price higher than budgeted. This confirms $20 million funding can be made available for local board capital expenditure within the Annual Budget 2025/2026 pending Governing Body decision making.

51. The allocation of this funding to local boards will be the decision of the Governing Body.

52. The funding will be ringfenced in a reserve as it is the result of a specific Governing Body decision and released as expenditure on eligible projects are incurred.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

53. There are no risks with the recommendations in this report.

54. There are risks to the timing of advice and decision making between each funding allocation method identified in the analysis and advice section above, which may have some impact to the final cost and timing of project delivery.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

55. Staff will collate all local board feedback and submit as an attachment to a report to the Governing Body in March 2025 for a decision to confirm the eligibility criteria and funding allocation method.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Update on the process for Fix and Finish Fund memo - 24 October 2024	127
b ⇩	Distribution of fundng to lcoal boards(15 January 2025)	131

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Hao Chen – Manager Local Board Financial Advisory

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Brian Chan – General Manager Financial Advisory

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Local board views on proposed plan change 106 for filming on Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua

File No.: CP2025/00484

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on proposed plan change 106 (PC 106) which identifies temporary filming activities on Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua (SPSMW) on public places as a permitted activity.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Decision-makers (independent commissioners) on a plan change to the Auckland Unitary Plan (AUP) must consider local boards’ views on the plan change, if the local boards choose to provide their views.

3. The purpose of PC 106 is to identify temporary filming activities on SPSMW in council-controlled public places as a permitted activity (i.e. no resource consent required). A film permit will still be required under the Te Ture ā-Rohe Tauhokohoko Whakahaerenga me te Tango Kiriata Tūmatanui 2022 Public Trading, Events and Filming Bylaw 2022 (the Bylaw).

4. A local board can present local views when expressed by the whole local board. This report provides the mechanism for the local board to resolve and provide its views on PC 106. Staff do not recommend what view the local board should convey.

5. Local boards received a memorandum on the draft plan change before it was finalised and notified for submissions. The submission and further submissions periods have closed. A total of 10 submissions were received, and no further submissions were received. The key themes of the submissions are support from screen industry, opposition to PC 106 unless amendments are made, and the application of PC 106 to Tūpuna Maunga Authority administered land.

6. This report seeks the views of the local board on proposed plan change 106. Next steps involve incorporating local board resolutions on proposed plan change 106 into the section 42A hearing report. Appointed local board members will be notified and invited to present their views at the hearing.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) provide its views on proposed plan change 106

b) appoint a local board member to speak to the local board views at a hearing on proposed plan change 106

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

Horopaki

Context

Decision-making authority

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

8. A plan change will be included in the AUP if it is approved. Local boards must have the opportunity to provide their views on council-initiated plan changes.

9. If the local board chooses to provide its views, the reporting planner will include those views verbatim, and address them, along with issues raised by submitters, in the subsequent hearing report prepared under section 42A of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

10. A local board member, appointed by resolution, may present the local board’s views at the hearing of submissions by commissioners, who then make decisions on the proposed plan change.

11. This report provides an overview of PC 106, and a summary of the key themes from submissions. The report author cannot advise the local board on what its views should be.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Plan change overview

12. The purpose of PC 106 is to remove the requirement for a resource consent by identifying temporary filming activities as a permitted activity in the AUP. Filming activities will still require a Film Permit from Screen Auckland (the regional film office for Auckland, based within Tātaki Auckland Unlimited) in accordance with the Bylaw. Currently, there is duplication of process for filming, as it requires both a resource consent to comply with the AUP and a film permit to comply with the Bylaw.

13. Amendments to AUP Chapter D21 Sites and Places of Significance to Mana Whenua are proposed to identify temporary filming activities (up to 30 days) as a permitted activity on SPSMW that are also public places. This status is subject to a standard that requires no land disturbance, that filming is undertaken in accordance with a site plan, and that it complies with any special conditions approved under the Auckland Council Film Permit. No changes are proposed to Schedule 12 of the AUP, which lists the SPSMW.

14. The film permit process ensures that filming activities respect the cultural values of the SPSMW and follow appropriate tikanga, while enabling people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being to achieve sustainable management.

15. Cultural values and mana whenua associations with SPSMW are protected and enhanced through the film permit process by requiring direct engagement with mana whenua and their participation in decision-making. This ensures that appropriate tikanga is considered, site plans and/or special conditions are applied where necessary, access for customary activities (i.e. mahinga kai) can be identified, and restricted areas, where toilets or food preparation must be avoided, are implemented to protect wāhi tapu and any tangible and/or intangible values of sites and places.

16. Supporting documentation is available from council’s website at https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/auckland-unitary-plan-modifications/Pages/details.aspx?UnitaryPlanId=272.

17. Council’s reporting planner will prepare a section 42A report for PC 106 for consideration by the independent hearings commissioners that evaluates and reports on:

· the contents of PC 106

· submissions (noting that no further submissions were received)

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

Themes from submissions received

18. Submissions were made by 10 people. Nine submissions were supportive, one was in opposition, and no submissions were neutral. Key submission themes are listed below.

· Support from the screen industry

· Oppose the plan change unless amendments are made

· Application of PC 106 to Tūpuna Maunga administered land.

Support from the screen industry

19. Several submissions supporting PC 106 are from members of the screen industry, seeking that it be approved without any amendments. Some clarification is also sought regarding what qualifies as “disturbance”, as AUP Standard D21.6.4(1)(b) provides for filming activities as a permitted activity as long as it does not involve “land disturbance”.

Oppose subject to amendments

20. One submitter (Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei) opposes PC 106 unless amendments are made to recognise the hapū or iwi with the strongest relationship to the filming location. Specific provisions are sought to be retained or removed to better reflect local hapū and iwi acknowledgement.

Application of PC 106 to Tūpuna Maunga Authority administered land

21. PC 106 currently excludes land administered by Tūpuna Maunga Authority. The Tūpuna Maunga Authority seeks amendments to PC 106 to enable temporary filming as a permitted activity on land it administers.

22. Information on individual submissions and the summary of all decisions requested by submitters is available from council’s website: https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/UnitaryPlanDocuments/pc-106-sdr-and-subs.pdf

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

Context

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

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

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

24. Both of council’s climate goals (climate adaptation and climate mitigation) are relevant and align with the requirementfor RMA decision-makers to:

· have particular regard to the effects of climate change (section 7(i) RMA), and

· have regard to any emissions reduction plan and any national adaptation plan prepared under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 (section 74(2) RMA) when preparing or changing a district plan.

25. Consequently, any local board views on climate adaptation and/or climate mitigation will be considered by the independent hearing commissioners when hearing submissions on PC 106.

Local board views - climate

26. The following prompts are included to assist the local board in forming any view (should it wish to do so) regarding climate mitigation and/or adaptation:

· How will PC 106 affect greenhouse gas emissions, if at all?

· How will PC 106 affect private motor vehicle trips, connections to and availability of public transport, walking and cycling infrastructure, if at all?

· Will climate risks, such as flooding, increased heat, coastal erosion, or extreme weather events be neutral, alleviated or elevated by PC 106?

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

27. No council groups have submitted on PC 106. The following council groups were consulted and provided an opportunity to provide feedback on the draft plan change:

a) Māori Heritage Team

b) Resource Consents

c) Auckland Transport.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. The purpose of PC 106 is to enable temporary filming activities on SPSMW in public places without the need for a resource consent.

29. A total of 18 out of the 21 local boards currently have SPSMW in public places that would be covered by PC 106 (noting that additional sites will be added over time). In terms of film permit applications, local boards are responsible for landowner approval for local parks and are notified of any film permit applications. This will not change.

30. Local boards have been kept informed of PC 106 as it has developed with memorandums in November 2022 and September 2024.

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

· interests and preferences of people in the local board area

· well-being of communities within the local board area

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

· responsibilities and operation of the local board.

32. The decision-maker will consider local board views, if provided, when deciding on PC 106.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

33. Council is required to consult with iwi authorities when preparing a plan change. The plan change has been developed in consultation with the 19 iwi authorities (mana whenua) through a series of engagements since December 2022. This engagement has occurred through pānui updates, engagement summary reports, kānohi ki te kānohi hui, collaborative working group hui, emails and telephone calls.

34. Prior to notifying PC 106 the following positions of mana whenua were understood:

· 11 support in principle a plan change

· 1 generally supports PC 106 subject to amendments; otherwise, opposes

· 3 have not provided formal feedback, but comments made by them have been considered

· 2 do not oppose PC 106

· 1 defers to others

· 1 prefers kaupapa to go through the Mana Whenua Forum.

35. Feedback from mana whenua on PC 106 supports an approach that provides for filming in public places as a permitted activity with permitted standards, and for mana whenua to have an increased role in decision-making for activities occurring on SPSMW. The importance of not undermining the SPSMW in AUP Schedule 12 and the provisions in AUP Chapter D21 was also emphasised as protection of the values of sites and places. All sites have their own pūrākau (stories), and iwi/hapū have individual tikanga for these sites.

36. Feedback from mana whenua directly informed the wording of PC 106. The only feedback not incorporated into PC 106 relates to amendments sought to recognise the ‘local’ or ‘appropriate’ iwi.

37. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei is the only iwi that submitted on PC 106. Their submission seeks that Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei’s ahi kā and mana whenua status within the ‘heartland’ of their rohe is recognised and provided for in the relevant amendments that are proposed to AUP Chapter D21 through PC 106. They also seek that their reo and identity is seen, heard and provided for in any filming on sites and places of significance that Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei are the tangata whenua. Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei are generally supportive of PC 106, but oppose it unless the amendments sought are incorporated to ensure the tangata whenua of the place where filming activities will take place on SPSMW are appropriately engaged with and involved in the decision-making.

38. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited – Screen Auckland have developed a draft SPSMW film permit process in collaboration with mana whenua. The draft SPSMW film permit process has a strong focus on relationship and engagement to enable ongoing collaboration to develop and integrate mana motuhake, tikanga Māori, the pūrākau and mauri of SPSMW.

39. The key elements of the draft SPSMW film permit process include:

· requirement to engage all mana whenua identified through the council’s contact tool

· applicants are encouraged to engage early to understand the implications of filming

· film facilitators inform mana whenua of all filming applications affecting SPSMW and confirm whether engagement has occurred

· timeframe to process applications is 20-25 days (compared to 3-5 for general applications)

· film facilitators confirm permit conditions with mana whenua

· where proposals are not supported by mana whenua, applicants will be directed to alternative sites.

40. Information requirements for film permit applications on SPSMW will be similar to those required by Tūpuna Maunga o Tamaki Makaurau Authority for the 14 co-governed tūpuna maunga.

41. The reporting planner will include in the hearing report an analysis of Part 2 of the RMA, which requires that all persons exercising RMA functions take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Sites of Significance is an issue of significance identified in the Schedule of Issues of Significance (2021) and the Māori Plan 2017 (Houkura Independent Māori Statutory Board), where it states on page 23 that:

Mana Whenua are enabled to maintain and protect sites of significance to reaffirm connections to the whenua and preserve for future generations.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

42. PC 106 does not pose any financial implications for local boards’ assets or operations.

43. Costs for the plan-making process are met by existing council budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

44. The local board will be unable to provide its views and preferences on PC 106, if it does not pass a resolution. This report provides:

· the mechanism for the local board to express its views and preferences

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

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

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

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

47. The reporting planner will include, and report on, any resolution from any local board in the forthcoming section 42A hearing report. Local board member(s) appointed to speak to specific local board’s views will be informed of the hearing date and invited to the hearing.

48. The reporting planner will advise the local boards of the decision on PC 106 by memorandum.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Eryn Shields - Team Leader - Planning

Authorisers

John Duguid - General Manager Planning and Resource Consents

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Changes to voting sign locations for the 2025 local elections

File No.: CP2025/01213

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide the local board with an assessment, to be tabled at the meeting, of their proposed changes to voting sign locations for the 2025 local election.

2. To enable the local board to make formal recommendations for any changes to voting sign locations to the Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. This report provides the local board with an assessment, to be tabled, of their proposed changes to voting sign locations for the 2025 local elections.

4. The current election sign locations, last updated in 2022, are listed in Attachment A. Local boards submitted informal proposals for changes in December 2024.

5. Auckland Transport has assessed these proposals, and the findings will be tabled at the local board business meeting.

6. This report seeks formal recommendations from the local board on voting sign location changes. These will be submitted to the Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee for consideration at their March 2025 meeting.

7. Final changes will be confirmed in March 2025 and the 2025 Candidate Handbook will be updated accordingly.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) tuku / provide its views to Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee on voting sign locations for the 2025 local elections.

Horopaki

Context

Regulatory framework

8. The Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Te Ture ā-Rohe mo nga Tohu Signs Bylaw 2022 sets regulations for election signs.

9. The bylaw permits election signs on both private property and council-controlled public spaces.

Roles and responsibilities

10. Auckland Council and Auckland Transport share responsibility for designating suitable locations and establishing usage conditions for election signs in council-controlled public areas.

11. Auckland Transport controls signs that are on or visible from the Auckland transport system. Auckland Council controls signs in every other case.

12. The Auckland Council Regulatory Committee and Auckland Transport Traffic Control Committee hold delegated authority to implement these regulations by resolution.

13. Since all election signs must face roadways, Auckland Transport has delegated authority to set regulations for election signs via the Traffic Control Committee.

Current election sign locations

14. Appendix B of the Auckland Council and Auckland Transport Signs Bylaw Control 2022 lists currently approved election sign locations and any site-specific conditions.

15. The current election sign locations for this local board are provided in Attachment A. These were last updated during the 2022 local elections.

Process for changing election sign locations

16. Staff did not propose any changes to the voting sign locations for the 2025 local elections. Local boards provided informal proposals for changes to the election sign locations in December 2024.

17. The 2025 Auckland Council Candidate Handbook must include sites for election signs. Staff need to update the list of election sites by 1 April 2025 to meet the publishing deadline.

18. Many current election sign sites are on local parks. The Traffic Control Committee requires input from the local board as the landowner before making any modifications to the current list of designated election sign locations.

19. Any recommend changes to voting sign locations will be sent to Traffic Control Committee for consideration at their March 2025 meeting.

20. Local boards will be informed of the final changes via memo in late March 2025.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

21. Auckland Transport have assessed the December 2024 proposed changes from the local board. The assessment will be tabled at the business meeting.

22. Attachment B provides guidance on suitable election sign site criteria for local boards to consider when suggesting changes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

23. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of climate impacts.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

24. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of council impacts.

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

Local impacts and local board views

25. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of local impacts.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

26. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of Māori impacts.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

27. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of financial impacts.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

28. The assessment, which will be tabled at the meeting, includes consideration of risks

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

29. The Traffic Control Committee will consider any formal local board recommendations for changes to election sign locations at its March 2025 meeting.

30. The updated election sign sites will be included in the 2025 Candidate Handbook.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	List of public sites for election signs	143
b ⇩	Election sign site criteria	155

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author	Maclean Grindell - Senior Advisor Operations and Policy
Authoriser	Nina Siers - Local Area Manager

Puketāpapa Local Board

20 February 2025

Urgent decision to provide Puketāpapa Local Board feedback on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill

File No.: CP2025/00215

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To note than an urgent decision was made to provide Puketāpapa Local Board feedback to be incorporated into the Auckland Council submission on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. At its meeting on 8 December 2022 the Puketāpapa Local Board resolved (PKTPP/2022/152):

a) delegate authority to the chairperson and deputy chairperson, or any person acting in these roles, to make urgent decisions on behalf of the local board, if the local board is unable to meet.

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

3. An urgent decision was required in this instance because the feedback needed to be provided by 7 February 2025 to be incorporated into the council’s submission. The Board’s next scheduled meeting was 20 February 2025. Delaying the feedback would result in the Board’s input not being able to be considered.

4. On 4 February 2025 the chairperson and deputy chairperson made an urgent decision on behalf of the Board to provide feedback on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill. The urgent decision is included in this report as Attachment A, and a memo from staff on the Bill as Attachment B.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Puketāpapa Local Board:

a) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the urgent decision made on 4 February 2025 to provide feedback to be incorporated into the Auckland Council submission on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill.

b) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note the provided feedback on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill to be incorporated into the council’s submission as follows:

i) whakarite / provide the following feedback on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill to be incorporated into the Auckland Council submission.

ii) tautoko / support in principle the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill and that streamlining the consenting process and reducing regulatory barriers proposed by the Bill can have benefits but that checks and balances must also be applied to ensure a quality compact city, infrastructure is well planned, and environmental protection.

c) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note concern that the reduction of checks and balances, can lead to:

i) the erosion of local governance and input

ii) poorly or unplanned development

iii) lack of alignment with local planning

iv) insufficient infrastructure and community facilities to service a growing community or new development areas

v) poor environmental outcomes

vi) support clearer guidelines and technical amendments to improve compliance to bolster the effectiveness and efficiency of consenting.

d) whakarite /provide the following feedback on key topics:

i) Urban Development and Housing: The Bill's focus on streamlining processes for housing and infrastructure aligns with the Local Board's goals for managing growth in rapidly developing areas like Wesley, Waikōwhai, and Three Kings. The Board's emphasis on ensuring well-designed, well-serviced, and resilient neighbourhoods (as outlined in the ‘Area Plan for parts of Puketāpapa and Albert-Eden Local Boards’) mirrors the Bill's provisions for easing the consenting process for housing developments and increasing flexibility in the Medium Density Residential Standards (MDRS).

ii) Climate Action: The Puketāpapa Local Board is committed to promoting climate resilience, as seen in its advocacy for nature-based solutions for stormwater management and climate action through the Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri plan. The Bill's amendments to support climate-focused projects, such as renewable energy infrastructure and stormwater management, support the Board's initiatives to reduce emissions, enhance climate resilience, and manage natural hazards like flooding, which are also challenges identified in the Local Board Plan.

iii) Transport and active modes: The Bill's aim to simplify consent processes for transport infrastructure, including public transport and active transport networks, aligns with the Board's focus on promoting walking, cycling, and public transport. The Board has specific initiatives to improve local cycling infrastructure, such as the Puketāpapa Greenways Plan, and advocates for better public transport connections. The Bill's provisions to streamline transport projects and enhance active transport networks directly support the Board's goals.

iv) Environmental protection: The Bill’s proposals for improving infrastructure for environmental protection, including stormwater management, align with the Local Board's focus on restoring the mauri of local waterways (e.g., Te Auaunga/Oakley Creek) and enhancing the resilience of natural environments. The Bill's focus on simplifying consenting processes for natural hazard projects complements the Local Board's advocacy for sustainable environmental management practices, including the protection of biodiversity and native tree planting as outlined in the Urban Ngahere Strategy. Another local example where simplification of resource consenting processes may be helpful is the removal of problematic pine trees which exacerbate erosion along the Waikōwhai coast.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Urgent Decision - Puketāpapa Local Board feedback on the Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill	165
b ⇩	Memo Resource Management (Consenting and Other System changes) Amendment Bill	167