Agenda of Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Auckland Transport Draft Statement of Intent 2025-2028

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Auckland Transport Update - April 2025

Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee

03 April 2025

Time of Use Charging Programme

File No.: CP2025/05314

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek endorsement of the Auckland Council Group submission on the Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill (the Bill), and delegation for final approval of the submission.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. We recommend supporting the Bill and its objective of using Time of Use Charging to reduce congestion. We also recommend supporting the Bill’s generally enabling approach to design of the charging scheme itself.

3. However, we do not recommend supporting the Bill’s proposed governance and revenue frameworks. In particular, the Bill centralises most decision making with central government, does not provide for local authority decision making over schemes which will impact their networks and does not facilitate a truly integrated approach to scheme design. We are concerned the Bill’s framework will not encourage the emergence of a ‘local champion’ that has been key to success of schemes overseas. The Bill also does not explicitly support the use of scheme revenue to fund key local scheme elements, such as complementary public transport (PT) services.

4. Our draft recommendations advocate for: a more integrated approach to scheme development and enhanced local influence, via a requirement that impacted local authorities approve scheme proposals and changes prior to submission to the Minister; automatic allocation of scheme revenue to all scheme costs, including essential complementary measures; allowance for limited mitigations to address fairness or cost impacts on vulnerable user groups (to be determined as part of and specific to future scheme designs); and greater equity of decision-making on scheme boards.

5. Overall, we recommend supporting the Bill, subject to resolution of the identified governance and revenue issues.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee:

a) tuhi tīpoka / note the government has released the Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill which, if enacted, would enable the council to initiate a Time of Use Charging scheme.

b) tuhi tīpoka / note that the Bill also enables New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi to initiate a Time of Use Charging scheme if Council decides not to propose a scheme.

c) tuhi tīpoka / note that the council submission on the Bill is separate to any future decision making by the council on the initiation of a Time of Use Charging scheme.

d) whakaae / approve the attached Council Group submission on the Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill.

e) tāpae / delegate approval of the final submission, including any updates arising from this meeting or minor refinements, to the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee and a member of Houkura – Independent Māori Statutory Board.

f) whakaae / agree that Council Group representatives present to the Select Committee.

Horopaki

Context

6. Congestion pricing, or Time of Use Charging, has been investigated a number of times as a tool to help address Auckland’s congestion challenges. Studies have consistently shown the potential for Time of Use Charging schemes to have significant congestion reduction benefits, but there is no legislative framework that allows for the consideration and implementation of these schemes.

7. In 2021 Auckland Council provided a submission to the then Select Committee Inquiry into congestion charging. At the time, the council supported it in-principle, conditional on:

· mitigation of equity impacts;

· provision of PT alternatives; and

· revenue raised to pay for costs of the scheme and be used to replace Regional Fuel Tax.

8. In November 2023, the Transport and Infrastructure Committee resolved for a joint Auckland Council / Auckland Transport (AT) Time of Use Charging project to “progress Time of Use Charging as soon as practicable” (resolution TICCC/2023/128) and to “report back on progress to the Transport and Infrastructure Committee on the planning and design of Time of Use Charging, including the benefits and disbenefits on communities and wider issues of equity” (resolution TICCC/2023/129).

9. In June 2024, the AT Board and Transport and Infrastructure Committee endorsed the scheme goal (congestion reduction) and noted that work would be undertaken to assess potential options and prepare for a submission on expected legislation.

10. AT and council officers have since undertaken work investigating multiple scheme options to understand the benefits and disbenefits of alternative scheme designs and policy settings. Initial analysis of operating structures and technology solutions has been undertaken, and early-stage engagement with partners and key stakeholders has been completed. This work has informed the proposed council submission.

11. At its meeting in December 2024, the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee requested staff prepare a submission on the Time of Use Charging legislation when it was introduced, for approval (TICCC/2024/139). Government released the Bill in December 2024. The first reading of the Bill was on 4 March 2025, with submissions due by 27 April. This report presents the requested submission for approval.

12. In September 2023 the Governing Body approved principles for transport reform in Auckland and requested the Mayor to engage with the Government [GB/2023/172]. The reform will enable joint decision-making between Auckland Council and the Crown for the delivery of transport priorities that give effect to strategic outcomes, and to establish a joint governance committee between the Crown and Auckland Council for transport planning and management in Auckland. In December 2024, the Government and the Mayor announced significant transport reform for Auckland to help simplify transport governance in Auckland. This included returning regional transport policy and planning to Auckland Council and establishing a new Auckland Regional Transport Committee (comprising Crown and Auckland Council members). The Government has signalled that a Bill will be introduced into the House within the next couple of months. It is important that the Land Transport Management (Time of Use Charging) Amendment Bill does not constrain the intent of this reform.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Key elements of the Bill

13. The Bill allows charging for the use of existing roads, if approved, by Order in Council. The Bill is generally enabling on the main elements of scheme design – particularly the location, quantum and timing of charging. Key elements of the Bill are as follows.

14. Purpose: The purpose of a scheme is to improve traffic flow in order to improve network productivity.

15. Scheme development process and Governance: Schemes may either be initiated by a proposal from a local authority or, if a scheme has not been initiated by a local authority within three years, by the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA) on direction of the Minister of Transport (the Minister).

16. Once proposed, schemes are developed by a Scheme Board, which carries out public consultation and proposes a final scheme to the Minister. The Scheme Board is made up of representatives, who we assume are officials, from participating local authorities and the NZTA. Voting rights on the Scheme Board are evenly split between local authorities and NZTA, but the NZTA provides the Chair and holds the casting vote.

17. The Minister receives the Scheme Board’s proposal and can refer it back to the Board for further work, recommend to the Governor General that it be established via an Order in Council or decline the proposal.

18. Scheme operation is undertaken by the Scheme Board. However, decisions to notify, and expand, the Time of Use Charging area within an approved wider scheme area, and to notify changes to charges within parameters set out in the Order in Council are made by the NZTA. Changes to the charging area require public consultation to be led by the Scheme Board, but no public consultation or engagement with the Scheme Board is required to modify the charge. The Bill also invites the NZTA to create national standards for the definition and operation of schemes.

19. Scheme revenue can be allocated to cover the Scheme Board’s establishment costs and scheme operational costs incurred by the NZTA and the Secretary of Transport. The remainder is allocated to land transport activities within the scheme region as agreed between local authorities and Minister in a new ‘investment agreement’. Local authority costs such as complementary measures (e.g. increased PT services) are not recognised in the Bill and would need to be negotiated as part of a specific investment agreement.

20. Exemptions are limited to emergency vehicles (e.g. police, ambulance) only. All other vehicles and users are liable for a charge and there is no ability to exempt certain user groups. Differential charges can be applied to certain vehicle types (for example, existing toll roads charge double for vehicles over 3.5t). The legislation is silent on mitigations (for example, discounts or via social welfare).

Support for enabling legislation

21. We recommend support for the Bill’s overall intent of enabling Time of Use Charging schemes, along with the Bill’s purpose of improving traffic flow and network productivity. This purpose is broadly consistent with what Transport and Infrastructure Committee agreed the purpose should be for a scheme in Auckland (TICCC/2024/57).

22. We also recommend support for the Bill’s generally enabling approach to scheme design. This provides the ability to tailor scheme design to local conditions and adapt overtime.

Overarching comment

23. The Council Group draft submission is provided as Attachment A. This includes:

a. a clause-by-clause analysis, to provide detailed comment on how the key points of our submission should be reflected in the legislation. External legal support has informed this.

b. a report that summarises insights from local boards, mana whenua, stakeholders and the public on Time of Use Charging schemes. This was developed as part of the joint council / AT project (Attachment B).

24. The Bill has two overarching issues that may limit the ability to achieve successful schemes:

a. A lack of joint governance and decision making between central Government and local authorities. Other than scheme initiation, there is no governance and decision-making function for the local authority to undertake public consultation and approve final scheme design prior to submission by the Scheme Board to the Minister - who has unilateral decision rights. This limits the potential success of a scheme, for example, international evidence shows that leadership from a local political champion – who can propose a scheme, engage with the public and then make changes in light of feedback – is often critical to success. The Bill makes the local champion role difficult, as scheme design and public consultation are undertaken by a Scheme Board (with a 50/50 representation between local authorities and the NZTA, but the NZTA Chair has the casting vote), while final decisions are made by the Minister, leaving little scope for local champions to lead and shape the scheme.

b. The legislation also does little to encourage integrated transport planning across local road, State Highway and multi-modal networks in scheme design, funding or governance. International evidence and feedback from Aucklanders shows that the introduction of charges needs to be coordinated with PT alternatives, mitigation of rat running, appropriate exemptions and public information campaigns. These are typically provided by local or regional authorities. However, the Bill does not recognise these measures as part of scheme design and governance. Nor does it provide for their automatic funding as part of scheme costs.

25. Key specific issues with the Bill, and recommended responses, are discussed in more detail below.

Scheme Design Governance

Issues

26. While local authorities can initiate a scheme, the key design decisions sit with the Scheme Board (where NZTA has the casting vote) and then the Minister. Consequently, a scheme could be changed significantly from an initial local authority proposal. Meanwhile, the Minister could impose a scheme without consent of a local authority.

27. This is an issue as modelling work shows potential for schemes to cause major traffic diversion onto local road and PT networks, imposing negative impacts and costs. This is the case even if only State Highways are charged. An integrated scheme design process would address these cross-network issues collaboratively, with all parties agreeing the solution. Scheme design should ideally also include agreements on proactive provision of complementary measures, such as additional PT services, to improve scheme operation.

28. The absence of a formal decision-making role for impacted local authorities means these issues may be overlooked in the final Order in Council, leaving local authorities to manage the costs and impacts. The introduction of NZTA’s ‘ramp metering’ scheme, which improves motorway operation at the expense of local roads, arguably provides an example of this situation.

29. As noted, because design, consultation and decision-making sits with the Scheme Board and Minister, there is less incentive and ability for local authorities to champion and lead scheme development.

30. Issues with local governance input have been recognised in previous tolling and regional fuel tax legislation, which in both cases recognised and gave stronger powers to the local authority to establish and oversee charges.

Recommended response

31. Resolving the governance issues is the most important change needed to the Bill. A governance solution requires enhanced local authority decision making, so all impacted authorities (both NZTA and local) can have confidence the scheme proposal will address their issues. We recommend:

a. Any scheme, or change to an existing scheme, impacting a local road network or PT system, including those initially proposed by the Minister, needs to be endorsed by the relevant local authority before being submitted to the Minister for final approval.

b. Joint decision making for the Scheme Board – for example consensus decision making or an independent chair – rather than NZTA casting vote.

c. Opposing the NZTA’s sole ability to determine changes in the charging area and scheme pricing, in line with the Order in Council. This should be a decision for the Scheme Board.

d. We recommend considering if there are opportunities for the reformed Regional Transport Committee (RTC) in Auckland to have a role in Time of Use Charging. This will depend on the composition and responsibilities of the new RTC. We do not recommend that the decision to endorse the final scheme proposal could be made through the reformed RTC. Given the significance of the decision, a joint governance mechanism would not be appropriate, this must be a decision of the whole council.

Revenue allocation

Issues

32. The Bill does not automatically provide for revenue allocation to essential complementary measures, such as PT services or traffic calming required for the smooth running of the scheme, capital costs to implement a scheme, or other local authority costs associated with scheme development. This suggests these costs would be borne by the local authority unless they are negotiated with the Minister in the investment agreement.

33. The allocation of any surplus funding, after scheme costs, is also negotiated through the investment agreement. This creates another ad hoc funding arrangement and does not necessarily link the investment of revenue to the scheme area.

Recommended response

34. Costs incurred by local authorities and costs for essential complementary measures should be captured in the scheme proposal and automatically funded from scheme revenue.

35. Any surplus revenue should be allocated to projects and services that enhance the benefits of the scheme by benefiting those impacted by the charge, consistent with the direction in the Regional Land Transport Plan and Regional Public Transport Plan.

Mitigations and exemptions for user groups

Issues

36. Mitigations provide a way to build social licence and address any potential issues around significant fairness and impact on vulnerable communities. International schemes include some form of exemption (in addition to emergency vehicles), and Auckland stakeholders have indicated support for exemptions.

37. There is a risk that exemptions may impact scheme effectiveness. However, the Bill’s approach of limiting exemptions to emergency vehicles will make it difficult to avoid genuine hardship for some groups and risks losing social licence if the scheme is generally seen as unfair.

Recommended response

38. Some limited ability to provide mitigations is a necessary part of a scheme. Drawing on feedback from the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee workshop, the submission argues that mitigations should be primarily delivered by government through the social welfare system. However, as government appears unlikely to provide mitigations, it would be prudent that the legislation retain flexibility to also enable discounts and exemptions as part of scheme design. Consequently, we recommend the submission:

a. state that mitigating the impacts of a charging scheme on vulnerable communities is the primary responsibility of the government acting through the welfare system (this reflects views from the workshop).

b. recommend that the Time of Use Charging legislation retain flexibility to also allow some limited scope for mitigations - particularly discounts and exemptions - to be proposed in scheme design, where they are needed to address significant fairness or cost impacts on vulnerable user groups, provided they do not materially impact scheme effectiveness and remain subject to approval through the Order in Council process.

c. Recommend that exemptions are also provided for subsidised PT services.

Other items

39. The Bill proposes that the legislation comes into force on the first anniversary of Royal assent. This risks unnecessary delay in implementation. We recommend local authorities be able to initiate a scheme immediately following Royal assent.

40. The Bill does not allow for the use of trials as part of scheme development. These have been expressly requested by the Political Reference Group, and although there are risks with trials that would need to be worked through, the submission recommends that the legislation allow a streamlined approach to facilitate faster implementation of short-term trials.

41. The Bill appears to allow significant scope for the NZTA to issue further national guidance around key scheme design elements. We are concerned that this could result in the secondary guidance reducing flexibility for local direction in the name of ‘national consistency’ and therefore recommend against two of these regulatory provisions in the Submission.

42. NZTA is proposed to collect charges and conduct billing. There is no detail on who will own and maintain physical infrastructure (cameras) or the analytics engine. We recommend supporting the proposed role of NZTA, however allowing for local flexibility and value for money in technology and processes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

43. There are no immediate climate impacts associated with this submission.

44. Work undertaken on Time of Use Charging during The Congestion Question (2020) showed that implementing such schemes would make a positive contribution to reducing transport emissions in Auckland. This is not the main purpose of a scheme, but a secondary outcome. This will be assessed in the scheme design process.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

45. The ‘Context’ section of this report sets out the recent council decisions and views with respect to Time of Use Charging. That section also notes the previous studies that have demonstrated the potential benefits of a Time of Use Charging scheme in Auckland.

46. A Political Reference Group and the Office of the Mayor have provided guidance to the joint Council / AT Time of Use Charging project since March 2024. This work has informed the draft submission.

47. The views from staff at both Council and AT have informed the development of this submission.

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

Local impacts and local board views

48. The legislation itself enabling Time of Use Charging will not impact any local board area specifically, however any scheme implemented in Auckland will impact local boards differently depending on the charge area.

49. Our submission recommends greater involvement for local authorities in the development and approval of any scheme. This will ensure that localised impacts are understood and addressed and that a final scheme is more responsive to local circumstances.

50. Local boards have been engaged twice in 2024 as the part of the joint Council / AT Time of Use Charging project. This included formal feedback in October 2024 (see Attachment B)

51. Many local boards noted that PT must be addressed before any time of use scheme is introduced, as many in their communities do not have the flexibility to change work hours or need to travel outside their area to access employment.

52. A common view was that revenue raised by a Time of Use Charging should be reinvested into continued improvements to PT, especially in those areas of Auckland that currently experience deprivation. Local boards also noted that a charge could be burdensome on households, so considerations need to be made for lower socio-economic communities by further exploring exemptions and daily caps.

53. We have reflected these views throughout the submission. In addition, local boards have been invited to provide feedback on the draft legislation. Consistent with established practice, any local board feedback received will be attached verbatim to the council’s submission.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. Early and ongoing engagement has been undertaken with mana whenua, with the programme attending AT mana whenua hui on two occasions (see Attachment B).

55. Houkura - Independent Māori Statutory Board has representation on the Political Reference Group and has resolved on a position paper (see Attachment B).

56. The joint Council / AT project has met with the Houkura secretariat to discuss the position paper and the Houkura schedule of issues of significance. Key issues raised in the position paper have been included in the draft submission. This includes supporting the need for a mana whenua impact assessment to be done as part of scheme design and, the ability to include mitigations in a Time of Use Charging scheme.

57. The Houkura position paper also emphasises the need for effective partnership in any future scheme development. For example, drawing on the existing evidence base covering potential scheme impacts on Māori, especially ahead of engaging with mana whenua and mataawaka. These practises are generally in place and will be implemented in future work.

58. A mataawaka engagement strategy will be developed for the next stage of scheme development once the Bill is enacted.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

59. There are no immediate financial implications arising from this submission. The investigation phase currently underway has been funded from AT operating budget.

60. The Regional Land Transport Programme allocated $4.4 million capital funding for Financial Year 2024/2025, however given the change in programme timeline, this funding has been deferred. Capital funding is targeted during business case development and co-design engagement with NZTA.

61. The programme has reduced costs and resourcing while maintaining a minimum viable team to continue key activities, including policy, planning and design development in preparation of the Select Committee submission, and ongoing engagement with partners and key stakeholders when appropriate.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

62. The main risks associated with this submission is that it indicates that the council is not comfortable with relying on the NZTA and central government policy process, as proposed in the Bill, to ensure positive outcomes for Auckland from a Time of Use Charging scheme. This may receive some public comment. However, we think being clear on these issues is necessary to provide evidence behind our concerns with the governance approach.

63. The Bill itself will create risks for Auckland and the council if implemented in its current form, but these risks are addressed in the body of the submission.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. The draft Select Committee submission will be updated with any changes resolved by the committee, and then approved by the Chair, Deputy Chair and a Houkura member.

65. The submission will then be submitted to Select Committee by the due date of 27 April 2025. It is recommended that a presentation by Council Group representatives is given to the Select Committee.

66. The work of the Council / AT Time of Use Charging project is being finalised. The outputs of the study will be released when completed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Draft submission on Time of Use Charging Bill
b ⇨	Insights Report, December 2024

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Hamish Bunn, Group Manager, Transport System Strategy & Policy, Auckland Transport

Graeme Gunthorp, Programme Director, Strategic Programmes, Auckland Transport

Michael Roth, Lead Transport Advisor, Auckland Council

Authorisers

Mark Lambert, Executive Programme Director, Auckland Transport

Dean Kimpton, Chief Executive, Auckland Transport

Megan Tyler - Director Policy, Planning and Governance

Barry Potter - Director Resilience and Infrastructure

Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee

03 April 2025

Making Space for Water – Wairau Blue-Green Network Stage 1 and 2 Business Case

File No.: CP2025/04617

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To provide information on the scope, financial requirements, and public engagement on the Wairau Blue-green Network Stage 1 and 2 to support the business case report in the confidential portion of this agenda.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Making Space for Water programme includes a range of initiatives to reduce flood risk to Aucklanders. Part of this is the construction of blue-green network projects which involve enhancing stormwater assets and green spaces to deliver increased flood management.

3. The proposed option for the Wairau Blue-green network includes:

· 550,000 m³ of stormwater detention in AF Thomas Park (Takapuna golf course).

· modifications to Wairau creek and channels.

· removal of the Woodbridge Lane bridge following property removal.

· detention pond upgrades at Link Drive, Becroft, Sunnynook, and Knightsbridge.

· stream daylighting overland flow paths and improve detention capacity at Nile Road and Totara Vale.

· and identifying redevelopment opportunities following property acquisition and flood mitigation.

4. The estimated cost for the Wairau Blue-green Network projects for both Stage 1 and Stage 2 design, consenting (this business case) and delivery (future business cases) is $156.4 million over seven years. This reduces flood risk for 261 properties in the Wairau catchment.

5. Early engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, including impacted residents, has been undertaken. They have expressed support for accelerating this work to provide flood protection and support community recovery. Users of AF Thomas Park have raised concerns regarding the impact of the proposed project on the existing 18-hole golf course. The Wairau business case will enable more comprehensive engagement and exploration of concerns and ideas suggested to date.

6. Staff recommend approving the business case for design of Wairau Stage 1 and 2 flood resilience for $13.3 million. This will enable staff to continue design, consent, and enabling works for Wairau Stage 1 ($11.8 million) and concept design for Stage 2 ($1.5 million), before physical works can begin. Subsequent business cases seeking the balance of the required funding ($141.3 million) will come to this committee as design proceeds.

7. While the remaining $46.3 million for Stage 1 can be accommodated within existing budgets and will be co-funded by the Crown, a decision to proceed will need to assess whether the final design delivers sufficient benefits and is in line with community expectations. The remaining $95 million for Stage 2 is not yet budgeted for and any decision to proceed with this stage will also need to identify an appropriate funding source.

8. Further details on the Wairau Business Case is provided in the confidential section of the 3 April 2025 Transport Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meeting agenda.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee:

a) tuhi tīpoka / note the information contained in this report, on the Wairau Blue-Green Network Stage 1 and 2 Initiate Business Case scope enables transparency on the topic due for discussion in the public excluded part of the meeting.

b) tuhi tīpoka / note that the confidential report contains information that could prejudice the council's commercial position with suppliers and commercially confidential information.

c) tuhi tīpoka / note that future business cases to enable realisation of these projects will come to committee as funding becomes available.

Horopaki

Context

9. Blue-green networks allow space for water to flood open space in heavy rain events, while delivering a wide range of amenity benefits in dry periods. This approach aligns with best practice stormwater management and the Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Plan.

10. Feasibility work and benefits analysis of the twelve identified blue-green focus areas has concluded that, after Māngere and Clover Drive, the next priority area for improvement should be Wairau. Many homes remain at risk of some level of flooding in this area, even after high numbers of Category 3 buy-outs.

11. Wairau was highly impacted in the flood events of 2023 and is a complex catchment that includes:

· 18 kilometres of waterways across 1450 hectares,

· historic swamp now with recurrent flooding,

· highly urbanised, home to 52,000 people,

· significant community assets and essential infrastructure,

· at least 142 category 3 properties, high insurance claims,

· two fatalities on 27 January 2023.

Responding to stakeholders and partners

12. Collaborative design is a key principle for the Making Space for Water programme. Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience Staff are partnering with elected members and mana whenua and are working closely with other stakeholder groups. These include flood-affected residents, the wider Wairau community, businesses, community organisations, AF Thomas Park tenants and users, and other asset owners.

13. Early engagement has been undertaken through direct meetings, public events, one-to-one relationships, and site visits. People are concerned about council’s ability to respond to and reduce flood risk in the wider catchment.

14. Further context is provided in the confidential section of the 3 April 2025 Transport Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meeting agenda.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. The key strategic objectives of this project are to:

Primary objectives:

· reduce flood risk

· protect core infrastructure

· increase resilience of stormwater assets

Secondary objectives:

· enhance water quality and reduce sedimentation

· better and more equitable open space provision and connectivity

· economic uplift due to job-creation and greater economic certainty

· enhance biodiversity and habitat

· community cohesion and social wellbeing

· efficient operation and maintenance of new assets

· optimise acquired category 3 land, including integration with potential re-development following flood mitigation works

· support Māori outcomes and meaningful mana whenua partnership.

16. Key strategic objectives will be further refined with project partners including mana whenua, community and critical stakeholders.

Multiple stages of delivery to reduce flood risk

17. Given the significant investment required, the project has been divided into three stages. The business case focuses on stages 1 and 2, which have the greatest immediate impact that align with the Crown and Auckland Council funding currently available, refer to Figure 1.

· Stage 1: AF Thomas Park (Takapuna golf course) and Woodbridge Lane Bridge removal (subject of Crown funding agreement).

· Stage 2: Tōtara Vale, Nile Road, and local detention upgrades (required to realise full benefits of Stage 1 and subject to future long-term plan funding approvals and redevelopment opportunities).

· Stage 3: Widening of Wairau Creek through Wairau Road to Kitchener Road. (included in long-term catchment regeneration strategy but physical works currently unfunded).

18. Staff have rigorously modelled the impact of a wide range of interventions under different rainfall scenarios to identify the most effective combination of physical works in the Wairau catchment to reduce high flood risk danger and habitable floor flooding. Refer to Attachment A.

19. Staff have considered four options for the development of this business case.

· Option 1 – Do nothing.

· Option 2 – Stage 1: AF Thomas Park (Takapuna golf course) flood storage optimisation and Woodbridge Lane bridge removal.

· Option 3 – Stage 1 (as above) plus Stage 2: Tōtara Vale / Nile Road works and associated detention upgrades.

· Option 4 – Stage 1 and 2 (as above) plus Stage 3: major modifications to Wairau creek through the commercial area down to Kitchener Road.

20. The preferred option is Option 3 which had the highest benefit cost ratio because it delivers the widest range of benefits to private properties and is most likely to be affordable over the next decade. This is comprised of Stage 1 and 2 works including:

· creating flood storage at AF Thomas Park (Takapuna golf course) through a wetland, dry detention basin and overland flow paths

· channels and culverts linking Wairau creek to the new storage at AF Thomas Park

· removing Woodbridge Lane bridge to reduce the risk of blockage and obstruction

· upgrading detention schemes at Link Drive, Becroft, Sunnynook, and Knightsbridge

· Nile Road daylighting, stream widening, overland flow paths

· Tōtara Vale stream naturalisation, increased detention, overland flow paths and associated amenity works

· coordination with the Storm-affected Land Use Policy to enable redevelopment opportunities in adjacent land and any additional critical property acquisition.

21. Delivery of Stage 1 and 2 would be over several years and require substantial long-term funding beyond what is currently funded by Central Government and the Auckland Council Long-term Plan 2024-2034.

22. Stage 1 works would reduce downstream flow by 30 per cent, reduce impact to key infrastructure including Watercare and Transpower assets and access to North Shore Hospital, and reduce risk of blockage. The estimated cost is $58.1 million and requires no additional property acquisition.

23. Stage 2 works would further reduce flood and blockage risks, improve amenity, and enable coordinated redevelopment. The estimated cost is $96.5 million, including some property acquisition.

24. Modelling indicates that Stage 1 and Stage 2 combined would reduce the number of dwellings in the Wairau catchment exposed to high danger flood risk by 35 and reduce flood risk for 261 total properties.

25. Further analysis is provided in the confidential section of the 3 April 2025 Transport Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meeting agenda.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

26. Modelling shows that storm and flooding events will be both more extreme and more frequent as the climate continues to change. Benefits analysis has been based on projected rainfall based on 3.8˚C temperature increase in a 1 per cent annual exceedance probability event.

27. Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland’s Climate Plan sets out a direction for Tāmaki Makaurau to prepare for the impacts of climate change, and to be proactive in taking measures to prevent or mitigate severe or irreversible outcomes. The Making Space for Water programme has been developed in accordance with this key direction with the Blue-Green Networks initiative focused on providing for the increased rainfall the city is projected to experience as the climate continues to change.

28. To support another key goal of Te-Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, all Making Space for Water projects will consider their impact on carbon emissions. Assessments will be conducted during the design, construction, and physical works stages to ensure all opportunities for reducing emissions are realised. Contractors will be required to report carbon and waste reduction practices as part of their contracts.

29. There are long-term carbon reduction benefits in blue-green networks, rather than traditional grey infrastructure, therefore these projects provide ongoing carbon reduction, asset resilience and climate mitigation benefits.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

30. Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience will work with Planning and Resource Consents, Licencing and Compliance, Legal Services, the Recovery Office, Watercare, Auckland Transport, Eke Panuku, and Parks and Community Facilities for physical works projects enabling storm recovery.

31. Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience will need to seek approval from Watercare and Auckland Transport to undertake work that will impact their assets during construction and have commenced discussions on these approvals, particularly regarding work in AF Thomas Park (Takapuna golf course).

32. Parks and Community Facilities, Sports and Recreation and Connected Communities are key partners in achieving positive place-making outcomes for these projects. Staff will aim to maximise co-benefits for this long-term investment, particularly regarding the future use of AF Thomas Park, parts of which are currently used as a golf course.

33. There is a need to balance community, recreation and flood resilience needs. The local board commissioned an assessment of recreational needs for AF Thomas Park in 2024. This is being led by Parks and Community Facilities and considers the likelihood of stormwater detention at AF Thomas Park. The assessment will be considered by the Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience project team. While the primary focus remains on maximising flood risk reduction benefits, recreational use is an important secondary benefit.

34. The Recovery Office has been a key partner to ensure that projects respond to the needs of flood-impacted residents and community organisations. They are also coordinating the Category 3 land acquisition process and Storm Affected Land Use programme. Strategically identifying land needed to deliver the blue-green networks and associated stormwater improvements is key to community-wide recovery and resilience and can enable long-term savings for project delivery.

35. Further details on the Council Group impact is provided in the confidential section of the 3 April 2025 Transport Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meeting agenda.

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

Local impacts and local board views

Local impacts

36. Blue-green networks provide localised benefits to a catchment, wider than can be achieved by property acquisition alone. The project will have positive impacts for those in the immediate vicinity. These include reduced flood risk, improved infrastructure resilience, and enhanced amenity value through re-purposing vacant sections following property buy-out and deconstruction. However, these benefits will only be realised once the projects are underway.

Early community engagement has informed the project approach

37. Community organisations and residents have been highly engaged in promoting social and waterway recovery, supported by Recovery Office and Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience staff since the flood events in 2023. They have shared their aspirations for catchment-wide recovery and that urgent action to reduce flooding risks is necessary. There is division, however, regarding how to achieve this outcome. Some believe the categorisation of homes with an intolerable risk to life adequately addresses these issues, while others remain concerned about ongoing flood risks.

38. Options were first shared publicly at a meeting in Milford on 6 December 2024, widely attended by approximately 180 impacted community members. To support public meetings and media enquiries some details of the Wairau Blue-green Network Project have been made public.

39. On 20 November 2024, the Kaipātiki Local Board resolved to defer any long-term decisions regarding the golf course’s lease on AF Thomas Park (KT/2024/243). This decision included discussion of a potential future blue-green network on the land. Takapuna Golf Course management has been operating on a monthly lease since February 2025 and were consulted extensively on the Kaipātiki local park management plan 2024 which includes provision for council to explore additional stormwater detention on the park.

40. Staff subsequently provided the Takapuna Golf Club management with further information about how the blue-green network project proposals may impact their operations at a meeting on 24 February 2025. Following this engagement we have received several media queries and both Auckland Council and Takapuna Golf Club have carried out interviews in several media outlets. A public event was held at the golf course on 8 March 2025.

41. A public event was held at the golf course on 8 March 2025 and following this meeting, a high volume of feedback was received opposing work at AF Thomas Park, before comprehensive community engagement has begun. In response, flood-affected communities have raised their concerns regarding this imbalance in stakeholder engagement.

42. More inclusive and formal engagement will be undertaken following the approval of this business case. Further detail on engagement to date is included in Attachment B.

Design development and consultation process

43. The current designs are provisional and subject to several factors, including final property categorisations, design development, funding availability, further flood modelling and agreements with affected residents and asset owners. All affected parties will be appropriately consulted before final design decisions are made.

Project benefits and implementation

44. The project will have positive impacts for those in the immediate vicinity. These include reduced flood risk, improved infrastructure resilience, improved open space access, and enhanced amenity value through re-purposing vacant sections following property buy-out and deconstruction. However, these benefits will only be realised once the projects are underway.

Local board views

45. Staff have regularly attended workshops with the Kaipātiki and Devonport-Takapuna Local Boards, approximately every three months to inform them of progress in their areas. These workshops covered the latest feasibility and design expectations. Recent sessions were held on 11 and 12 March 2025 to share the most current project approach and public sentiment. Local board feedback provided in these workshops has informed the development of the business case.

46. Based on feedback received at workshops, both local boards support the Wairau Blue-green Network proposed projects and staging of works, which begins with works at AF Thomas Park to facilitate flood reduction outcomes in the lower catchment.

47. The local boards have requested staff leverage existing strong community connections to engage residents and wider communities in the project development process. The Recovery Office community navigators have been instrumental in building these connections and are working with the project team to identify stakeholders and integrate them into the project.

48. Local boards have delegated decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities (including decisions about local parks improvements and place shaping, and community events) on local parks (including drainage reserves and parks that have a stormwater purpose); but decisions relating to any council stormwater activities on such parks sit with the Governing Body (and therefore staff in the Healthy Waters department). This is outlined in a memo ‘Stormwater Activities on Council Land’ provided to local boards in June 2024. However Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience will work closely with local boards with the local boards on any design and operational impacts on A F Thomas Park.

49. As has been established for the Māngere projects, community working groups, including local board and community organisation representatives, will be set-up to provide for collaborative input to project design.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

50. Staff provide general Making Space for Water programme updates to the Resilience and Infrastructure Mana Whenua Kaitiaki Forum each month. This is an opportunity for all participating mana whenua to identify ways to engage with this initiative. There has been strong advocacy for nature-based solutions, including cultural considerations in design, and enabling local Māori involvement in the projects.

51. Blue-green Networks project managers and senior staff are working with relevant mana whenua regarding projects in their rohe. This has included regular hui, site visits, and catchment walks.

52. Early discussions have been held with mana whenua to ascertain which iwi wish to partner on this project. Te Kawerau ā Maki and Ngāti Paoa are part of the Wairau Project Working Group, and Ngai Tai ki Tāmaki have requested to stay informed via regular updates. Wider mana whenua will be kept informed through programme updates. The working group meet regularly and have undertaken a site hikoi. They are supportive of the proposed approach and are partnering with the project team to develop and refine the purpose, principles and preferred options.

53. The Wairau Blue-green Network proposes to return parts of the piped network to naturalised streams and create new assets to improve biodiversity and water quality. This enhances Te Mauri o te Wai and connection of all people, particularly mana whenua, to their local awa.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

54. The business case in the confidential portion of this agenda is seeking approval to spend up to $13.3 million for the design and consenting costs associated with Stage 1, Stage 1 enabling works (removal of Woodbridge Lane Bridge) and costs required to realise concept design only for Stage 2.

55. Of the $13.3 million requested in this business case, the funding contribution required from Auckland Council long-term plan capital expenditure is $5.98 million. This will consist of long-term plan funding allocated through the Making Space for Water Programme, refer to Table 1 below. Aside from Crown funding in Stage 1, it is expected that Auckland Council will need to cover the balance of the project cost.

Table 1: funding split between Crown and Auckland Council

Funding Split	Funding Agency		Total
Funding Split	Crown	Auckland Council	Total
Stage 1 funded through Crown / Council NIWE co-funding agreement	$ 7,316,000	$ 4,484,000	$ 11,800,000
Stage 2 AC LTP funding	$ 0	$ 1,500,000	$ 1,500,000
Stage 1 & 2 total funding required	$ 7,316,000	$ 5,984,000	$ 13,300,000

56. The full cost of the project is expected to be $154.6 million. Allocation of this funding from Auckland Council budgets will be considered as part of the Long-term Plan 2027-2037.

57. Further details on financial implications is provided in the confidential section of the 3 April 2025 Transport Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meeting agenda.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. A range of high-level risks for this project are detailed in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Risks and mitigations

Risk type	Risk Description	Mitigation
Cost	Potential for contaminated sediment and fill that must be carted to a controlled landfill and disposed of at additional expense.	1. Investigations to date do not show concerning contamination. Investigations will be completed during the design development phase.
Design	There is also a risk that after the initial design work is complete that there is not a technically feasible solution where the expected benefits will likely exceed the expected cost or is acceptable to the community.	2. Staff will monitor this risk as design work progresses. 3. Council staff consider that this is an acceptable risk at this stage as there is a compelling need to explore potential solutions to flooding in the Wairau catchment.
4. Community	5. Community acceptance of the proposal to change the use of AF Thomas Park from a golf course to a large stormwater storage facility.	This will be mitigated by working closely with the local community and the AF Thomas Park tenants and users to seek alignment of the outcome for that site with community ambitions and the stormwater project needs.
6. Community	7. On-going consultation or delays in delivery may cause prolonged distress for the community, exacerbating existing trauma.	Sharing clear expectations as the project progresses will provide certainty where possible. Community support services remain available.
8. Land availability	9. Stage 2 only: contiguous land acquisition to deliver the projects at Nile Road and Tōtara Vale may not be achieved in a reasonable timeframe, nor for the costs estimated.	High contingency (40%) includes allowance for potential cost escalation. Required land acquisition will be further refined as part of Stage 2 concept design and will consider this risk. Auckland Council aims for willing buy-willing seller arrangements.
10. Land availability	11. Risk of misalignment of Stage 2 works with the wider Storm Affected Land Use Programme, where required land may become unavailable before this project is underway.	We will continue to work closely with the relevant project teams to ensure that input and coordination is completed in a timely manner, and that the Stage 2 programme takes the potential redevelopment timing into account.
Delivery	Design and construction of the stormwater storage facility requires coordination and acceptance of the design by key infrastructure asset owners: Watercare, Vector and Waka Kotahi.	We will establish an infrastructure coordination group early in development of the project to ensure these providers inform the design as its progressed.
Delivery	Resource consenting and obtaining other permissions may take longer than planned.	Accelerated approaches to obtaining consents and approvals will be explored and selected on the most efficient approach to deliver the works. This could include Order in Council, parceling consents into discrete elements, working with the technical reviewers to accelerate investigations, approving an envelope of effects and working closely with Auckland Councils Premium Team to agree effects areas to assess through early engagement with specialist.

59. Some risks, such as further severe weather events are unavoidable. Given the vulnerability of the communities and infrastructure in these catchments, there is greater sensitivity to future storm and flood events. This risk can only be mitigated by delivering the proposed works as soon as possible, however this residual risk will remain until works can be completed.

Risk of not progressing

60. Should we not progress this work, this catchment would continue to be vulnerable to significant flood risk, affecting lives and property, which would impact ongoing safety, wellbeing and economic investment throughout Wairau catchment. Extreme weather events such as those experienced in early 2023 are projected to become more regular and more severe, making this project a critical investment in our collective future.

61. Should we progress Stage 1 works only there is a risk of misalignment of Stage 2 works with the wider Storm Affected Land Use Programme. Progressing Stage 2 concept design ensures that input and coordination is completed in a timely manner and that redevelopment potential and associated co-benefits are able to be realised. Further to this, should Stage 2 concept design not progress at this point, the Category 3 land acquired as part of the Recovery Programme would remain under-utilised, attract additional cost to maintain, and may present a health & safety and reputational risk until design and project works are progressed.

62. The existing financial contribution (62 per cent) from central government presents a unique opportunity to address some longstanding flooding issues in the Wairau catchment. If we do not progress with this project under the current funding framework, it is possible that these issues may never be adequately resolved.

63. Further to this the Category 3 land acquired as part of the Recovery Programme would be under-utilised, attract additional cost to maintain, and may present a health & safety and reputational risk.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

64. This committee will be asked to approve the Wairau business case to progress design, consenting, and enabling works for this project in a confidential report on this agenda, 3 April 2025.

65. Final business cases will be brought to this committee once design has been completed and we are ready to commence construction. It is noted that approval will still be subject to additional funding being available in the 2026/2027 financial year.

66. If additional funding is confirmed from council and remains available from the Crown, staff will be able to confidently commence consent processes, property acquisition requirements, and project tendering.

67. Throughout this process, communities, local boards, and mana whenua will be invited to participate in community working groups. The purpose of these community working groups is to inform design choices prior to design finalisation to maximise co-benefits.

68. Progress on the blue-green network initiative as part of the Making Space for Water programme will continue to be provided in three-monthly updates to the Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee and relevant local boards.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Flood reduction table
b ⇨	Wairau Blue-green Network Engagement Approach

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Craig Mcilroy - General Manager Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience

Sara Swart – Principal Project delivery

Tom Mansell - Head of Sustainable Partnerships

Authorisers

Ross Tucker - Group Chief Financial Officer

Barry Potter - Director Resilience and Infrastructure

Chairperson	Cr Andrew Baker
Deputy Chairperson	Cr Christine Fletcher, QSO
Members	Cr Josephine Bartley	Cr Kerrin Leoni
	Houkura Member Billy Brown	Cr Daniel Newman, JP
	Mayor Wayne Brown	Houkura Member Pongarauhine Renata
	Cr Angela Dalton	Cr Greg Sayers
	Cr Chris Darby	Deputy Mayor Desley Simpson, JP
	Cr Julie Fairey	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
	Cr Alf Filipaina, MNZM	Cr Ken Turner
	Cr Lotu Fuli	Cr Wayne Walker
	Cr Shane Henderson	Cr John Watson
	Cr Richard Hills	Cr Maurice Williamson
	Cr Mike Lee

Date	Subject
19/03/2025	Memorandum: Time of Use Charging enabling legislation submission (to LB members).
26/03/2025	Memorandum: Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board - Item 13 - Chairperson's Report - Speed Management and the Draft Land Transport Rule Setting of Speed – Memorandum, 19 March 2025. Resolution CP2025/03852
27/03/2025	Memorandum: Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Office monthly update

Date	Subject
5/03/2025	CONFIDENTIAL Workshop – Level Crossings
19/03/2025	OPEN Workshop – Speed limit reversal

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee Forward Work Programme
b ⇨	Memorandum: Time of Use Charging enabling legislation submission (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	19 March 2025 - Open Workshop - Speed limit reversals, Materials (Agenda, Notes and Notes attachments) (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Memorandum: Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board - Item 13 - Chairperson's Report - Speed Management and the Draft Land Transport Rule Setting of Speed – Memorandum, 19 March 2025. (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇨	Memorandum: Tāmaki Makaurau Recovery Office monthly update (Under Separate Cover)

Author	Taryn Muir - Executive Officer
Authoriser	Barry Potter - Director Resilience and Infrastructure

Author	Lata Smith - Kaitohutohu Mana Whakahaere Matua / Senior Governance Advisor
Authoriser	Barry Potter - Director Resilience and Infrastructure

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