Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 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 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting, held on Wednesday, 19 March 2025, including the confidential section, as a true and correct record.

5 He Tamōtanga Motuhake | Leave of Absence

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

6 Te Mihi | Acknowledgements

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

7 Ngā Petihana | Petitions

At the close of the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.

8 Ngā Tono Whakaaturanga | Deputations

Standing Order 7.7 provides for deputations. Those applying for deputations are required to give seven working days notice of subject matter and applications are approved by the Chairperson of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. This means that details relating to deputations can be included in the published agenda. Total speaking time per deputation is ten minutes or as resolved by the meeting.

8.1 Deputation - Auckland Rugby League

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Mark Craig, Club Development Officer, Auckland Rugby League will be in attendance to share the results of the feasibility report for the Manukau Magpies Rugby League Club, which was funded by the local board.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Mark Craig, Club Development Officer, Auckland Rugby League, for his attendance and presentation.

8.2 Deputation - Diamonds in the Rough

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Shilpa Wilson and Gwenneth Coleman from Diamonds in the Rough, a charitable trust that equips and empowers young mothers (including teenage mothers) and families by using a neuroscience-based, holistic approach to mental wellness, will be in attendance to share more information about who they are and what they do.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Shilpa Wilson and Gwenneth Coleman from Diamonds in the Rough, for their attendance and presentation.

8.3 Deputation - Desire for Greatness gym

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Sigi Pesaleli, founder of the D4G or Desire for Greatness gym, will be in attendance to seek support for a local council facility lease. They are currently renting at the Fale Dojo gym, 66 Portage road, Ōtāhuhu.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Sigi Pesaleli, founder of the D4G or Desire for Greatness gym, for his attendance and presentation.

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.

9.1 Public Forum - Careers & Gateway Coordinator, Ōtāhuhu College

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. Chrissy Reuelu, Head of Careers & Gateway Coordinator at Ōtāhuhu College, will be in attendance to talk about the Gateway Programme being delivered at Ōtāhuhu College, discuss strengthening the school's connection with the community and exploring potential work experience opportunities with local businesses.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakamihi / thank Chrissy Reuelu, Head of Careers & Gateway Coordinator at Ōtāhuhu College, for her attendance and presentation.

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.”

Governing Body member Update

File No.: CP2025/03839

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. A period of time (10 minutes) has been set aside for the Manukau Ward Councillors to have an opportunity to update the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board on regional matters.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the verbal reports from the Manukau Ward Councillors.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacqueline Robinson - Democracy Advisor

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Local Board Leads and Appointments Report

File No.: CP2025/03846

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To allow the local board members an opportunity to present verbal and written updates on their lead roles, such as relevant actions, appointments and meetings.

2. To make any appointments to vacant positions.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Members have an opportunity to update the board on their activities as topic area leads.

4. The table below outlines the current leads and alternates for topic areas of local board business meetings and organisations on which the board is represented through a formal appointment.

Topic Area	Lead	Alternate
Social Impact Fund Allocation Committee Appointments Committee	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Staff consultation over landowner approval applications (excluding applications for filming and events)	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Staff consultation on applications for filming	Christine O’Brien	Makalita Kolo
Liquor licence matters, to prepare and provide objections, if any, and speak to any local board views at any hearings on applications for liquor licences	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Resource consent matters to: i) provide the local board views, if any, on whether a resource consent should proceed as a non-notified, limited notified or fully notified application ii) prepare and provide local board’s views, if any, on notified resource consents and speak to those views at any hearings if required iii) provide the local board’s views on matters relating to or generated by the COVID-19 (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 while this legislation remains in force	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Christine O’Brien
Local Government New Zealand Auckland Zone	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Select shared representatives to council working groups, working parties and other internal bodies, where there is a limited number of local board representatives to be selected from amongst all 21 or clusters of local boards	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Manukau Harbour Forum joint committee	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Ara Kōtui (formerly Māori input into local board decision-making political steering group)	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Staff consultation on applications for events and other activities on local parks and local facilities that also require regulatory approval, or may involve reputational, financial, performance or political risk	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Approve the local board’s input into Auckland Council submissions on formal consultation from government departments, parliament, select committees and other councils, when timeframes do not allow for local board input to be considered and approved at a local board meeting	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Infrastructure and Environmental Services	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Arts, Community and Events (including libraries)	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Parks, Sport and Recreation and Community Facilities	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Christine O’Brien
Local planning, housing, and heritage – includes responding to resource consent applications on behalf of board	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	1st half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua 2nd half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa
Transport	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	1st half of the term: Harry Fatu Toleafoa 2nd half of the term: Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Economic development	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Makalita Kolo
Youth, Children, Seniors and Uniquely Abled	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Water care COMMUNITY	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Auckland Airport Community Trust for Aircraft Noise Community Consultative Group	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Ambury Park Centre	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo	Christine O’Brien
Department of Corrections - Community Impact Forum for Kohuora Corrections Facility	Makalita Kolo	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Māngere Bridge Business Association	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich	Christine O’Brien
Māngere East Village Business Association	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Māngere Mountain Education Trust	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Makalita Kolo
Māngere Town Centre Business Association	Makalita Kolo	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Ōtāhuhu Business Association	Christine O’Brien	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
Ōtāhuhu Portage Project Steering Group	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo	Christine O’Brien
Ōtāhuhu Town Hall Community Centre Incorporated Society joint committee	Makalita Kolo	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
South Harbour Business Association	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo
Tāmaki Estuary Environmental Forum	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Makalita Kolo
Te Pukaki Tapu O Poutukeka Historic Reserve & Associated Lands Co-Management Committee	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-Management Committee. MO/2023/187 · to agree changes of a minor nature to the Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Agreement in Attachment A of the agenda report, in consultation with Te Ākitai Waiohua / Pūkaki Māori Marae Committee · to sign on behalf of Auckland Council the Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Agreement in Attachment A of the agenda report · as an additional member to Te Pūkaki Tapu o Poutūkeka Co-management Committee, to come into effect on agreement with Te Ākitai Waiohua / Pūkaki Māori Marae Committee on a total Co-management committee membership of six	Tauanu’u Nanai Nick Bakulich
The Southern Initiative (TSI) Steering Group	Harry Fatu Toleafoa	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
Emergency Readiness and Response Forum MO/2024/52 To participate in the Emergency Readiness and Response Forum	Chairperson Deputy Chairperson Member Harry Fatu Toleafoa

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whiwhi / receive the verbal and written reports from local board members.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacqueline Robinson - Democracy Advisor

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Round Two Grant Allocations

File No.: CP2025/04054

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To fund, part-fund or decline applications received for 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Grant Round Two.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 15 May 2024, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme 2024/2025, provided as Attachment A, which sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

3. This report presents applications received in the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Grant Round Two, provided as Attachment B.

4. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $216,771 for the 2024/2025 financial year.

· On 18 September 2024, a total of $43,233.88 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Quick Response Round One (MO/2024/123).

· On 20 November 2024 a total of $77,317 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grant One (MO/2024/154).

· A total of $3,261 returned from grants application LG2509-163, grants were not uplifted due to the closure of Tim Bray Theatre,

· $775.76 refunded from application QR2509-164: Partial refund as the funding was not fully utilised,

· $119.97 refunded from application QR2509-104: Partial refund as the funding was not fully utilised,

The refunded amount was returned to the 2024/2025 Community Grant budget.

· On 19 February 2025, a total of $3,500 was reallocated from Community Grant to the Young Enterprise Scheme (Activity ID 1268) (MO/2025/17).

This leaves budget of $96,876.85 for one Local Grant round and one Quick Response round.

5. Twenty-seven applications have been submitted to the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Grant Round Two, requesting a total of $48,195.17

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakaae / agree to fund, part-fund, or decline each application in the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Round Two.

Application ID	Organisation	Main focus	Requesting funding for	Amount requested
QR2509-202	South Auckland Seniors and Youth Association Incorporated	Community	Towards monthly meeting related cost such as food, drink, fuel, stationary, gifts at 90 High Street, Ōtāhuhu from 2 May 2025 to 30 September 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-204	Hope For The Hopeless Charitable Trust	Community	Towards cost to produce two hundred healthy meals for homeless people at 29 Avenue Road Ōtāhuhu from 9 May 2025 to 20 June 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-209	Māngere Hawks Netball Club	Sport and recreation	Towards the cost of first aid training for officials at Māngere Hawks Netball Club from 6 May 2025 to 27 June 2025	$1,952.17
QR2509-210	Guardians of Our Children Charitable Trust	Community	Towards a contribution towards programme delivery cost including facilitator, meeting, volunteer and peer support related cost at Ōtāhuhu Town Hall Community Centre from 1 June 2025 to 31 May 2026	$2,000.00
QR2509-211	Mobility Assistance Dogs Trust	Community	Towards a contribution for overall mobility dog veterinary cost from 1 May 2025 to 31 July 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-213	Maliumai Community Trust	Community	Towards venue hire, refreshment, koha and barbeque hire cost to deliver a one-day Pacific men support workshop at The Polynesian Centre from 1 May 2025 to 30 June 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-216	Signature Tautai Trust	Arts and culture	Towards bus hire cost to Spark Arena for community to attend Mana Moana Auckland Show on 2 May 2025	$1,144.00
QR2509-218	Taulanga U	Community	Towards skin bin hire and rubbish removal cost to clean up the Community Garden at Radonich Park from 1 May 2025 to 30 July 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-220	Ōtāhuhu Business Association Incorporated	Community	Towards afternoon tea cost to run Ōtāhuhu Safety Panel at 19 Hall Avenue, Ōtāhuhu from 16 April 2025 to 15 October 2025	$1,080.00
QR2509-221	Zayed College for Girls	Environment	Towards purchasing fruit and native trees, seeds, garden maintenance materials, waste bins to deliver Greener School Landscape and Sustainable Waste Management project at Zayed College for Girls from 5 May 2025 to 28 November 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-225	Mafutaga Savavali Magele Tutoatasi NZ	Community	Towards venue hire and refreshment cost to deliver Mafutaga Savavali Magele Tuto'atasi project at Moana Nui-a-Kiwa Pool and Leisure Centre from 1 May 2025 to 4 January 2026	$2,000.00
QR2509-226	School Start First Impressions	Community	Towards school bags to support local tamariki from 4 June 2025 to 4 August 2025	$1,450.00
QR2509-227	Big Buddy Mentoring Trust	Community	Towards a contribution for office rent, psychological assessments, advertising, and staff supervision costs to deliver programmes from 1 May 2025 to 30 April 2026	$2,000.00
QR2509-228	Te Ararata Stream Team	Environment	Towards cost of utilities, operating, administration, and koha for intern training for Te Ararata Stream Projects from 1 May 2025 to 2 September 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-230	Epilepsy Association of New Zealand Incorporated	Community	Towards fuel and phone cost to supply epilepsy support services Auckland wide from 1 May 2025 to 31 March 2026	$500.00
QR2509-231	Ōtāhuhu College Board of Trustees	Environment	Towards seedlings and saplings, fertiliser, trunk protectors, stakes and ties, associated tools and gear cost to upgrade school garden for Ōtāhuhu College from 5 May 2025 to 11 December 2026	$2,000.00
QR2509-232	Totara Farm Trust	Community	Towards staff education and training cost for Totara Farm Trust from 1 May 2025 to 30 November 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-233	PHAB Association (Auckland) Incorporated	Community	Towards a contribution for transportation cost to deliver Working it Out project at Allan Brewster Leisure from 17 May 2025 to 16 March 2026	$2,000.00
QR2509-234	Counties Manukau Sport Foundation	Community	Towards coaching fee and equipment hire cost to deliver Bike Bus project in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu from 2 July 2025 to 19 September 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-237	Sir Douglas Bader Intermediate School	Sport and recreation	Towards Netball Dresses, Netball Bibs and Multi-purpose sports tees for Sir Douglas Bader Intermediate School sport teams from 1 May 2025 to 12 December 2025	$1,996.00
QR2509-238	Margaret Feeney	Arts and culture	Towards clay, community workshop facilitator time, bisque and firing costs and artist time to make Te Ararata Stream Tiles from 7 June 2025 to 26 July 2025	$1,000.00
QR2509-239	Re-Creators Charitable Trust	Community	Towards tutor fee, project management, prep and materials, marketing, traveling and admin cost to deliver Community Upcycling Workshops at local community centres and libraries in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu from 1 May 2025 to 31 July 2025	$1,800.00
QR2509-241	Ōtāhuhu Town Hall Community Centre	Community	Towards purchasing sewing machine and facilitator time to deliver Threads of Heritage project at Ōtāhuhu Town Hall from 8 May 2025 to 7 August 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-242	Oke Charity	Community	Towards a tunnel house for the outdoor classroom at Ōtāhuhu Intermediate School from 24 May 2025 to 31 May 2025	$2,000.00
QR2509-245	Rata-Raemon Towgood-Taiwhanga	Environment	Towards concrete, piping and connector, taps and tape, admin time and sprayers cost to install irrigation system at 17 Elmdon Street, Māngere Street, Māngere on 1 July 2025	$2,200.00
QR2509-246	Māngere 275 Times	Community	Towards flight ticket and accommodation to attend Community Newspapers Association Networking Event And Awards Evening in Christchurch on 9 May 2025	$1,073.00
QR2509-247	twosevenfive. Foundation	Events	Towards stage manager cost to deliver twosevenfive Day 2025 at Māngere Town Centre Carpark on 27 May 2025	$2,000.00
Total				$48,195.17

Horopaki

Context

6. The local board allocates grants to groups and organisations delivering projects, activities and services that benefit Aucklanders and contribute to the vision of being a world-class city.

7. The local board grants programme sets out:

· local board priorities

· lower priorities for funding

· higher priorities for funding

· exclusions

· grant types, the number of grant rounds, and when these will open and close

· any additional accountability requirements.

8. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopted the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grants Programme as presented in Attachment A. The programme sets application guidelines for contestable community grants submitted to the board.

9. The community grant programme has been extensively advertised through the council grants webpage, local board webpages, local board e-newsletters, Facebook pages, council publications, and community networks.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

10. The aim of the local board grant programme is to deliver projects and activities which align with the outcomes identified in the local board plan. All applications have been assessed utilising the Community Grants Policy and the local board grant programme criteria. The eligibility of each application is identified in the report.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

11. The Local Board Grants Programme aims to respond to Auckland Council’s commitment to address climate change by providing grants to individuals and groups for projects that support and enable community climate action.

12. Community climate action involves reducing or responding to climate change by residents in a locally relevant way. Local board grants can contribute to expanding climate action by supporting projects that reduce carbon emissions and increase community resilience to climate impacts.

13. Examples of projects include local food production and food waste reduction, increasing access to single-occupancy transport options, home energy efficiency and community renewable energy generation, local tree planting and streamside revegetation, and educating about sustainable lifestyle choices that reduce carbon footprints.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

14. The focus of an application is identified as arts, community, events, sport and recreation, environment, or heritage. Based on the focus of an application, a subject matter expert from the relevant department will provide input and advice.

15. The grants programme has no identified impacts on council-controlled organisations and therefore their views are not required.

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

Local impacts and local board views

16. Local boards are responsible for the decision-making and allocation of local board community grants. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is required to fund, part-fund or decline these grant applications against the local board priorities identified in the local board grant programme.

17. Staff will provide feedback to unsuccessful grant applicants so they can increase their chances of success next time.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

18. The local board grants programme aims to respond to the council’s commitment to improving Māori wellbeing by providing grants to individuals and groups who deliver positive outcomes for Māori. Auckland Council’s Māori Outcomes Delivery, Ngā Mātārae has provided input and support towards the development of the community grant processes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

19. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board has set a total community grants budget of $216,771 for the 2024/2025 financial year.

· On 18 September 2024, a total of $43,233.88 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Quick Response Round One (MO/2024/123).· On 20 November 2024 a total of $77,317 was allocated towards 2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Grant One (MO/2024/154).

· A total of $3,261 returned from grants application LG2509-163, grants were not uplifted due to the closure of Tim Bray Theatre;

· $775.76 refunded from application QR2509-164: Partial refund as the funding was not fully utilised;

· $119.97 refunded from application QR2509-104: Partial refund as the funding was not fully utilised;

· The refunded amount was returned to the 2024/2025 Community Grant budget.

· On 19 February 2025, a total of $3,500 was reallocated from Community Grant to the Young Enterprise Scheme (Activity ID 1268) (MO/2025/17).

This leaves budget of $96,876.85 for one Local Grant round and one Quick Response round.

20. Twenty-seven applications have been submitted to the 2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Grant Round Two, requesting a total of $48,195.17.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

21. The allocation of grants occurs within the guidelines and criteria of the Community Grants Policy and the local board grants programme. The assessment process has identified a low risk associated with funding the applications in this round.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

22. Following the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board allocating funding, grants staff will notify the applicants of the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	2024/2025 Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Community Grants Programme	27
b ⇨	2024/2025 Māngere-Otāhuhu Quick Response Round Two - Application Summary (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Amber Deng - Grants Advisor

Authorisers

Pierre Fourie - Grants & Incentives Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Expressions of interest applications and granting of a new community lease for the Thomas Clements building, 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062

File No.: CP2025/06144

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek approval from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board to grant a new community lease to 360 Tautua Trust Board or TOA Pacific Incorporated for the Thomas Clements Building located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board did not identify and approve a new lease as part of the Customer and Community Services: Community Leases Work Programme 2024/2025 since the building was being renovated at the time of approval.

3. In a workshop held on 10 July 2024, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolved, following the completion of renovations, for staff to call for expressions of interest to lease the council-owned building (approximately 295m² more or less) located on 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062.

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

5. All applications were discussed with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board at a workshop held on 5 February 2025.

6. Staff received direction from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local to include the names of groups that have been shortlisted for the Thomas Clements Building in a formal business report for consideration. The two groups in consideration for the granting of a new community lease are either 360 Tautua Trust Board or TOA Pacific Incorporated.

7. This report recommends granting a new community lease to 360 Tautua Trust Board for a term of 2 years commencing with one five-year right of renewal.

8. This allows for maximum use of the site and aligns with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2023 Outcome:

‘Our People - Our people are our strength. Engaging with our diverse communities – from Māori, Pacific peoples, and children to rangatahi (youth) and senior people – enables us to provide the services and facilities they need, leading to better wellbeing.’

9. The land occupied by the Thomas Clements building at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062 is held in fee simple by the Auckland Council subject to the Local Government Act 2002,

10. Iwi engagement is required and took place in February and March. No objections have been received.

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

12. If the local board decides to grant the lease, staff will work with the successful lessee to finalise the lease agreement.

13. The proposed new community lease for the Thomas Clements building at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062 will be publicly notified prior to the finalisation of the lease. The notification will appear in the Manukau Courier and the Auckland Council website’s Have Your Say webpage

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakaū / confirm either 360 Tautua Trust Board or TOA Pacific Incorporated as the preferred applicant for the granting of a new community lease for 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu

b) whakaae / grant a new community lease to the successful applicant for an area comprising approximately 295m2 located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu on the land legally described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 61994, contained in Record of Title NA111B/356 held in fee simple by the Auckland Council subject to the Local Government Act 2002 (as per Attachment A – Site Plan), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – two (2) years 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).

c) whakaae / approve all other terms and conditions in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 and 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 successful applicant for an area comprising approximately 295m2 located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu

d) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that iwi engagement for Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to the successful applicant located at Thomas Clements building at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu has been undertaken.

e) tuhi ā-taipitopito / note that public notification for Auckland Council’s intention to grant a new community lease to the successful applicant located at Thomas Clements building at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu has not been undertaken and therefore we cannot comment on any objections received.

Horopaki

Context

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

15. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board did not identify and approve a new lease as part of the Customer and Community Services since the building was being renovated.

16. 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.

17. The local board directed staff to initiate an Expression of Interest for parties interested in occupying the building.

18. The Thomas Clements Building located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu has a trust deed that states that the land and building will/should be utilised for the priority of senior citizens.

19. Staff advertised and sought applications, this included the community broker contacting groups who met the deed criteria in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area.

20. Four applications were received. Staff assessed all applications and the results were workshopped with the local board. Staff received direction from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local to include the names of groups that have been shortlisted for the Thomas Clements Building in formal business report for consideration. The two groups in consideration for the granting of a new community lease is either 360 Tautua Trust Board or TOA Pacific Incorporated.

21. Staff recommend offering the community lease to 360 Tautua Trust Board, as this group scored the highest through the assessment analysis process. In addition, 360 Tautua Trust Board proposed use of the site aligns with the outcome of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan:

22. Furthermore, 360 Tautua Trust Board requires a premise in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area as their members reside within this area so they can continue to offer their service.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The land

23. The Thomas Clements building is located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu (Attachment A Site Plan). The land legally described as Lot 2 Deposited Plan 61994, contained in Record of Title NA111B/356 held in fee simple by the Auckland Council subject to the Local Government Act 2002

A building with a roof

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Figure 1. Site plan: The Thomas Clements building, 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062

24. The Thomas Clements building is situated at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062. The building is owned by the council and is approximately 295 sqm in area.

25. The building comprises one large open space (hall) which has a partition, two lockable rooms, toilets, including a disabled-friendly toilet, and a kitchenette.

26. The building is in good condition as it has been recently refurbished. Renovations completed include newly fitted carpets and vinyl, paintwork, new lights, a new heat pump, and new toilets.

Expressions of Interest process

27. At the expressions of interest closing date four applications had been received. The four applicants were:

· 360 Tautua Trust Board

· TOA Pacific Incorporated

· Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust

· Ōtāhuhu Business Association Incorporated.

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

· eligibility – is membership open or restricted

· trust deed- The trust deed states that the land and building will/should be utilized for the priority of senior citizens

· financial stability – did the group provide accounts, were the accounts audited, is the group reliant on council funding, is the group affiliated with 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 is 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

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

29. After assessment of the applications, staff presented their findings to the local board at a workshop on 5 February 2025. The highest-scoring applicant was the 360 Tautua Trust Board as they provided more reference letters and elaborated on sharing the space with other groups. In addition, the club can demonstrate its ability to deliver local board outcomes to the community. The group provides a valuable service to the community by providing services and programmes for senior citizens.

Groups that meet the assessment criteria

360 Tautua Trust Board

30. 360 Tautua Trust Board was established in December 2019 with the mission to honor and support Pacific Matua (seniors) through culturally relevant care, deeply rooted in the guiding value of Tautua ma le Alofa – to serve with love.

31. Their programs, such as workshops, talanoa (conversations) and educational initiatives, are designed to empower participants, reduce social isolation and strengthen community ties.

32. Their main activities include workshops, interactive talanoa (conversations), educational programs, digital literacy and numeracy initiatives, off-site trips and intergenerational and community engagement. These programs are designed to create spaces for elders to rediscover joy, purpose and connection while bridging relationships between generations and strengthening community ties.

33. Through collaboration with church groups, health and social services, businesses, philanthropy and government agencies, 360 Tautua stands as a beacon of love, faith and service for Pacific communities.

34. 360 Tautua Trust Board currently has 80 members. 75 are aged over 65+ years and the remaining 5 members are aged between 22 years to 65 years. They provide free services and do not restrict access.

35. 80 percent of their members are locals and the remaining 20 per cent are outside the local area.

36. 100 per cent of their members are from the Pacific Island.

37. Their gender percentage is female 92 per cent and male 8 per cent.

38. 360 Tautua Trust Board will use the building for 38 hours per week. Some of the programs that they currently run include:

· Eva Ma Le Koko is a dedicated space where our Pacific seniors can thrive and embrace their golden years with confidence, independence, and a renewed sense of purpose.

· Matua Go Digital - Matua Go Digital offers a comprehensive digital inclusion program specifically designed for Pacific seniors aged 60 and older who seek training in navigating digital devices.

TOA Pacific Incorporated

39. TOA Pacific Inc was registered in 2002 whilst under Methodist Mission Northern, working with Pacific older people in Auckland and Māngere and funded by the Health Funding Authority. Methodist Mission Northern supported TOA Pacific to move to independence in 2003 with an Elder Abuse Contract and two Ageing in Place contracts working with older Pacific people.

40. TOA Pacific was based at 241 Massey Road for two years and moved to Ōtāhuhu to their current address at 214 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu in July 2005.

41. TOA is an acronym that stands for Treasuring Older Adults, so the main activities of the organization focus on contributing to enhanced well-being and safety of older people. TOA Pacific Inc. responds to Elder Abuse referrals in ways that promote and uphold their rights to independence, participation, self-fulfillment, care, and dignity.

42. The main activities are:

· the MAAMA programme, where two full-time staff plan and deliver day activity programs three days a week, two days in Ōtāhuhu and one day in Mt Roskill

· 1.5 full-time employees are dedicated to responding to Elder Abuse referrals and prevention work

· Home visitation of home bound older people

· family/whanauaiga carers

· family violence support.

43. TOA Pacific Inc currently has 150 members of which 140 are aged over 65+ years and the remaining 10 members are aged between 22 years to 65 years.

44. 120 of their members are locals and the remaining 30 members are outside the local area.

45. 97 per cent of their members are Pacific Islanders and 3 per cent are Māori.

46. Their gender percentage is male 30 per cent and gender neutral 70 per cent.

47. TOA Pacific Inc will use the building for 56 hours per week Some of the programs that they currently run include:

· MAAMA Programme - Maama is a health and disability information/education service for Pacific older people. Mamma uses traditional Pacific music and dance to encourage Pacific elders to connect, share, and be active

· Empower-to-Pamper (EtP ) Programme - the Prevention of Elder Abuse and Neglect for Pacific People in Auckland

· Asiasiga - trained volunteers and staff visit homebound Older People in the community

· Time Out - caters for older people with Alzheimer’s, who have suffered a stroke or live alone during the day.

Groups that did not meet the assessment criteria

Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust

48. Established in 2020, Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust is a charitable organization dedicated to bridging a crucial gap in support for individuals facing vision loss. Their mission is to offer comprehensive, personalized assistance to those navigating vision loss, with a focus on under-served communities, including low-income, Māori, Pasifika, and other ethnic minority groups.

49. They provide a variety of services across Auckland to enhance quality of life and promote community involvement, employment opportunities, career development and greater independence, including:

· orientation and mobility training

· low vision adaptation

· assistive technology training

· independent living skills

· diabetes lifestyle program

· free eye exams

· diabetes meal subscription program (D.Box Program)

50. Vision Rehabilitation Services Trust currently has 48 regular and 20 casual members. For regular members, there is no membership fee, and a Koha for casual users.

51. 10 per cent of their members are aged between 14 years to 21 years, 30 per cent of their members are aged over 65+ years and 60 percent of their members are aged between 22 years to 65 years.

52. 70 per cent of their members are locals and the remaining 30 per cent are outside the local area.

53. 50 per cent of their members are Māori, 30 per cent Pacific Island, 10 percent Asian, and 10 percent NZ European.

54. Their gender percentage is female 70 per cent and male 30 per cent.

Ōtāhuhu Business Association Incorporated

55. The Ōtāhuhu Business Association Incorporated supports the economic development of the Ōtāhuhu commercial area. They do this through a range of key focuses and support businesses in Ōtāhuhu and the wider area to be economically viable. Their aim is to make Ōtāhuhu a great place to run a business, shop, visit, live and invest. Some of the services they provide are:

· events, activations and promotions

· marketing and advertising

· security, crime prevention and CCTV.

· advocacy lobbying and support

· workshops, training and collaboration events

56. The Ōtāhuhu Business Association Incorporated currently has 2500 members of which 25 per cent are aged over 65+ years and 75 per cent are aged between 22 years to 65 years.

57. 40 per cent of their members are locals and the remaining 60 per cent are outside the local area.

58. 60 per cent of their members are Asian, 15 per cent Pacific Islanders, 20 per cent NZ European and 5% per cent other.

59. Their gender percentage is 70 per cent male and 30 per cent female.

Public notification and engagement

60. Under the Local Government Act 2002, Auckland Council must publicly notify its intention to grant a new community lease if the term is longer than six months in duration.

61. The proposed new community lease for the successful applicant for the Thomas Clements building at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062, was not publicly notified as the successful applicant has not been decided.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

62. It is anticipated that the activation of this building will not result in an increase of greenhouse gas emissions.

63. A shared community space will however decrease overall energy use, as users will not consume energy at individual workspaces. The shared space will provide opportunities and enable people to enjoy positive healthy lifestyles and will increase capability and connections within local community.

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

· use sustainable waste, energy, and water efficiency systems

· use eco labelled products and services

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

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

66. All measures taken are aimed at meeting the 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

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

67. The granting of the proposed new community lease will have no impact on greenhouse gas emissions as the proposal does not introduce any new source of emissions.

68. Climate change has an unlikely potential to impact the lease, as no part of the leased area is in a flood-sensitive or coastal inundation zone.

Figure 2: Image from Auckland Council Flood Viewer of 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

69. 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 – Māngere-Ōtāhuhu

· Sport & Recreation Lead – Active Recreation

· Senior Heritage Assets Advisor – Heritage Information & Advice

70. 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

71. The proposed lease will benefit the community by enabling initiatives that promote and help to create space for elders to rediscover joy, purpose, and connection while bridging relationships between generations and strengthening community ties within the local board area and its surrounding communities.

72. The assessment of the application was discussed with the local board at its workshop on 5 February 2025. The local board indicated its in-principal support of the lease proposal.

73. The delivered activities align and support the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2023 Outcome: ‘Our People - Our people are our strength. Engaging with our diverse communities – from Māori, Pacific peoples, and children to rangatahi (youth) and senior people – enables us to provide the services and facilities they need, leading to better well-being.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

74. Iwi engagement about the council’s intention to grant a new community lease for Thomas Clements Building located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062 was undertaken in February and March 2025 with the number of iwi groups identified as having an interest in land in the local board area. The engagement involved:

75. 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.

· Te Ākitai Waiohua - Both are worthy candidates. What I do know is -TOA Pacific has a long-standing reputation for elder care, health education, and whanau-centred services. 360 Tautua Trust Board focuses on supporting Pasifika communities through programs and services, with an emphasis on cultural and social well-being for all (Pasika).

· Te Ahiwaru Trust - No opposition to this lease

· Te Kawerau ā Maki- Iwi have been informed and the response is the group defers to Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Trust.

76. 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.

77. 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.

78. Community leasing aims to increase Māori well-being through targeted support for Māori community development projects.

79. 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

80. All costs relating to the advertisement of the council’s intention to grant the proposed lease will be borne by the Parks and Community Facilities department of the council.

81. Staff have consulted with the Financial Strategy department of the council. No concerns were raised regarding the financial implications for the proposed new lease to name of lessee for name of asset.

82. 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

83. Should the local board resolve not to grant the proposed community lease to 360 Tautua Trust Board at the Thomas Clements building located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062, the group’s ability to obtain a premise in Ōtāhuhu to undertake all current and future activities will be negatively impacted. This will have an adverse impact on the achievement of the desired local board plan outcome/s.

84. Should the local board resolve not to grant the proposed community lease to TOA Pacific Incorporated at the Thomas Clements building located at 9 Princes Street, Ōtāhuhu 1062, the group’s ability to expand and move their senior citizens' programs to the Thomas Clements building will be impacted. This will have an adverse impact on the achievement of the desired local board plan outcome/s.

85. If the building remains vacant, there is a risk associated with the lack of maintenance and possible vandalism. The council will be liable for the assets regardless of whether the budget is allocated to or identified for renewals.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

86. If the local board resolves to grant the proposed new community lease, staff will work with the successful applicant to finalise a lease agreement in accordance with the local board’s decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site plan	49

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Gordon Ford - Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business - Parks & Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Proposed new community lease to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust at Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere

File No.: CP2025/06146

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To grant a new community lease to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust for its facilities in the office space at Māngere Town Centre at Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust seeks a new community lease to commence occupation and operation from the council-owned building at Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere.

3. Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust has occupied the property since circa 2010. However, it appears that no formal lease arrangement was ever entered into.

4. Given the length of time Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust has occupied the premises, it may be considered as having an implied lease and therefore a formal lease must be entered into.

5. The new lease was identified and approved by the local board as part of the Community Facilities: Community Leases Work Programme 2023/2024 at their 26 July 2023 local board meeting (Resolution number MO/2023/84).

6. Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust aims to provide financial and budgeting services to the Māngere community. These activities align with the local board plan 2023 outcome of Our Community and Our People.

7. Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust has provided all required information, including financials, showing that it has sufficient funds and is being managed appropriately. The Trust has all the necessary insurance coverage including public liability in place.

8. Mana whenua engagement took place in February 2025, and no concerns were raised.

9. This report recommends that a new community lease be granted to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust for a term of five years commencing from the date of this report with one five-year right of renewal.

10. If the local board decides to grant the lease, staff will work with the tenant to finalise the lease agreement and a community outcomes plan.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tuku / grant under Section 54(1)(d) of the Reserves Act 1977, a new community lease to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust for 50 square meters (more or less) located at Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere on the land legally described as Allotment 411 Parish of Manurewa held in Record of Title NA47C/885 (as per Attachment A – Site Plan), subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) term – five years, commencing on the date of this report, with one five-year right of renewal

ii) rent – $1,300 plus GST per annum

iii) operational charge - $2,250 plus GST per annum

iv) Community Outcomes Plan - to be included within the lease as a schedule of the lease agreement (as per Attachment B – Community Outcomes Plan – tabled at the meeting).

b) whakaae / approve all other terms and conditions to be in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977, the Auckland Council Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 (Updated July 2023) and the Auckland Council standard form community lease agreement.

Horopaki

Context

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

12. Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board approved the Community Facilities: Community Leases Work Programme 2023/2024 at their 26 July 2023 local board meeting (Resolution number MO/2023/84).

13. The progression of this lease to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust located at Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere was part of the approved work programme. This report considers the new community lease as approved on the work programme.

Land, building/s and lease

14. The Local Purpose Reserve known as Māngere Town Centre is located at Māngere Town Square, Māngere (refer to Attachment A Site Plan). The land is legally described as Allotment 411 Parish of Manurewa held in Record of Title NA47C/885 and classified as Reserve for Local Purpose (Municipal Buildings).

15. The Trust has occupied the council-owned land and building situated at Māngere Town Centre - Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Māngere. However, no formal lease agreement is in place.

16. The area proposed to be leased is 50 square meters (more or less)as outlined in Attachment A

17. An annual subsidised $2250 per annum plus GST operational cost for a council-owned building is charged to the tenant.

18. The building is primarily used by the group to provide financial budgeting services.

19. These programmes provide free, supportive, confidential, and culturally aware budget advisory services to its community, including the Pasifika community.

Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust

20. The trust was established in April 2003 and its primary purpose is to provide a comprehensive community-based budget advisory information and support service for its community, with a particular focus on Pasifika people.

21. The trust has 11 paid staff and one part-time volunteer. It is open Monday to Friday from 9.00 am to 3.00 pm, totalling 30 hours per week.

22. The tenant has been operating from this site since circa 2010.

23. Although the trust has held occupancy since 2010, there is no formal lease arrangement, and therefore a formal lease must be entered into.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

24. At the expiry of a lease for a council-owned building, a review of alternatives for the use of the premises should be carried out as good practice. For this, an expression of interest process can be undertaken to gauge interest and best use. However, if the incumbent group is needed in the area and the group is performing well, the local board has the discretion to grant a new lease to the group without undergoing an expression of interest process.

25. The assessment of the application was workshopped with the local board on 10 April 2024. The local board indicated its in-principle support of the lease proposal.

Assessment of the application

26. The trust has submitted a comprehensive application supporting the new lease request and can demonstrate its ability to deliver financial budgeting services.

27. The trust has provided financials that show that accounting records are being kept, funds are being managed appropriately and there are sufficient funds to meet liabilities.

28. The trust has all necessary insurance cover, including public liability, in place.

29. A site visit has been undertaken by staff and the center is well managed and maintained.

30. The group provides a valuable service to the local community by giving comprehensive community-based budget advisory information and support services. The Trust has a particular focus on Pasifika people. The Trust’s service supports families who are financially struggling and gives them the confidence to undertake a path working towards financial independence.

31. A Community Outcomes Plan has been prepared to identify the benefits it will provide to the community. This will be attached as a schedule to the lease agreement and tabled at the meeting as Attachment B.

32. Auckland Council’s Community Occupancy Guidelines 2012 (Updated July 2023) sets out the requirements for community occupancy agreements and the community outcomes plan will be included as part of the lease agreement if approved by the local board.

33. Staff recommend that a new community lease be granted to Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust for a term of five years commencing from the date of this report as per recommendations with one five-year right of renewal.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

34. It is anticipated that the continued use of the building will not increase greenhouse gas emissions.

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

· use sustainable waste, energy, and water efficiency systems

· use eco-labeled products and services

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

36. All measures taken are aimed at meeting the 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

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

37. Climate change has an unlikely potential to impact the lease, as no part of the leased area is located in a flood-sensitive or coastal inundation zone.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

38. Council staff from within the Customer and Community Services Directorate have been consulted. They are supportive of the proposed lease as it will include positive outcomes.

39. 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

40. The proposed lease will benefit the community by enabling initiatives that promote financial literacy and independence for the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area and its surrounding communities.

41. The assessment of the application was workshopped with the local board on 10 April 2024. The local board indicated its in-principle support of the lease proposal.

42. The delivered activities align with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2023 priority area(s):

· Community - We are home to the largest population of Pacific people in Auckland. We also have a high proportion of Māori residents and growing ethnic diversity. That diversity means we need dynamic spaces and facilities. Our venues, local parks and open spaces must provide for the everchanging experiences of our residents now and in the future. We will do this this by partnering with mana whenua and our wider community

· People - Our people are our strength. Engaging with our diverse communities – from Māori, Pacific peoples, and children to rangatahi (youth) and senior people – enables us to provide the services and facilities they need, leading to better wellbeing.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

43. Iwi engagement about the council’s intention to grant this new community lease was undertaken in February 2025 with the iwi groups identified as having an interest in the land at Māngere Town Centre.

44. Of priority to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is an enhanced relationship with Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Trust.

45. With respect to this relationship, staff have arranged and attended a face-to-face hui with Te Ākitai Waiohua and an online meeting with Te Ahiwaru Trust.

46. Staff engaged and presented this, and other work program items, for consideration. Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Trust, respectively, have confirmed their support for all items presented.

47. Other groups that may have an interest in this rohe have been engaged via email with the request for feedback by 28 February 2025. Typically, these groups defer to Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Trust.

· Te Ākitai Waiohua - no opposition to this lease

· Te Ahiwaru Trust - no opposition to this lease

· Te Kawerau ā Maki - defers to Te Ākitai Waiohua and Te Ahiwaru Trust

· Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei - as these areas are outside of our tribal takiwā, we defer to Te Waiohua as tangata whenua for your local board area

· Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Tamaterā, Ngāti Te Ata, Ngāti Whanaunga and Waikato-Tainui have been emailed for their Mana Whenua feedback, however staff have not received any feedback.

48. No objections or requests for hui or kaitiaki site visits were received from the iwi and mana whenua groups who responded.

49. The lessee has agreed, via the Community Outcomes Plan, to deliver Māori Outcomes that reflect their local community as per Attachment B of this report. The lease will benefit Māori and the wider community through education and well-being through the Trust’s financial advisory and budgeting services.

50. 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.

51. These commitments are articulated in the council’s key strategic planning documents the Auckland Plan, the Long-term Plan 2021-2031, the Unitary Plan, individual local board plans and in Whiria Te Muka Tangata, Auckland Council’s Māori Responsiveness Framework.

52. Community leasing aims to increase Māori well-being through targeted support for Māori community development projects.

53. 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

54. Staff have consulted with the Local Board Financial Advisory team of the council. No concerns were raised regarding this lease.

55. Ongoing maintenance of the asset will be covered by the council which is accounted for in current and future budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

56. Should the local board resolve not to grant the proposed community lease, the group’s ability to undertake all current and future activities will be negatively impacted. This will impact on the achievement of the desired local board plan outcome/s.

57. The new lease gives the group security of term. Should the building become unoccupied, an expression of interest will have to be carried out to find a new tenant.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

58. If the local board resolves to grant the proposed new community lease, staff will work with the trust to finalise the lease agreement.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Site Plan - Shop 17, 17R Māngere Town Square, Orly Avenue, Māngere	57
b ⇩	Community Outcomes Plan - Vaiola P.I. Budgeting Service Trust - to be tabled	59

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Gordon Ford - Community Lease Specialist

Authorisers

Kim O’Neill - Head of Property & Commercial Business - Parks & Community Facilities

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

New leases to be granted at properties situated along the Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve

File No.: CP2025/04488

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To approve four new leases at properties situated along the Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Eke Panuku Development Auckland (Eke Panuku) on behalf of Auckland Council manages several leases along the Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve. Four of these have expired and are on holdover arrangements, whereby one month’s notice to terminate may be provided by either party at any time.

3. Eke Panuku has discussed new commercial terms with tenants for each of these four expired leases and seeks local board approval for the recommended commercial lease terms.

4. All tenants have industrial businesses, and their uses are detailed in the Analysis and Advice section of this report. The uses remain unchanged from current and environmental impacts have been addressed in the report.

5. Public consultation and iwi engagement close on 6 April 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whakaae / approve a new lease at 104 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu on the following terms:

i) Term – Five years with a further right of renewal of five years

ii) Use – Storing vehicles

b) whakaae / approve a new lease at 106 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu on the following terms:

i) Term – Three years with a further right of renewal of two years

ii) Use – Motor garage and vehicle sales

c) whakaae / approve a new lease at 157 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu on the following terms:

i) Term – Five years with a further right of renewal of five years

ii) Use – warehousing, wholesaling, and retail of truck tyres, tubes, batteries, lubricants, and other associated auto products. Tyre fitting and servicing of motor vehicles and trucks, and office and administrative purposes associated with tyre reprocessing operation

d) whakaae / approve a new lease at 29 Saleyards Road, Ōtāhuhu (Front) on the following terms:

i) Term – Five years with a further right of renewal of five years

ii) Use – Truck Stop and Fuelling Station

e) whakaae / approve a new lease at 29 Saleyards Road, Ōtāhuhu (Rear) on the following terms:

i) Term – Five years with a further right of renewal of five years

ii) Use – Yard storage

Horopaki

Context

6. The Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve is a long narrow parcel of land which stretches along multiple properties. The future use of this property is for the Portage Route Project and is anticipated to be used as a green corridor/cycleway/walkway. The canal reserve is held by the Crown through the Department of Conservation and is vested in the Auckland Council, in trust, for local purpose (canal) purposes.

7. New leases need to comply with s61(2) of the Reserves Act 1977. The local board must provide a resolution approving both the term and use of each lease.

8. Section 8(6) of the Public Bodies Leasing Act 1969 requires council to publicly advertise the proposed lease of the land, unless the lease term is less than 5 years, or determinable at any time by 6 months’ notice or any shorter notice. All the new leases will be for non-determinable periods of five years or less to ensure compliance with the Public Bodies Leasing Act.

9. Under Section 138(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 – the intention to grant a new lease requires public notification.

10. Iwi Consultation is required for all new leases under the Reserves Act 1977.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

11. The approximate locations of each leased area are marked on the aerial map on the next page to give context on their location and significance on the Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve.

12. All existing tenants have expressed an interest to remain in occupation subject to agreement on commercial terms. Term and use for each lease are detailed below, with new leases now intended to commence on 1 May 2025 (subject to agreement of commercial terms which are still being negotiated).

Property Address	Current Tenant	Lease Term Requested	Permitted Use
104 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu	Existing Occupier, new lease	5 Years with 1x 5 Year right of renewal, subject to a 6 month Landlord-side termination clause after the initial 5 year term.	Storage of vehicles
106 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu	Existing Occupier, new lease	3 Years with 1x 2 Year right of renewal.	Motor Garage and Vehicle Sales
157 Great South Road, Ōtāhuhu	Existing tenant	5 Years with 1x 5 Year right of renewal, subject to a 6 month Landlord-side termination clause after the initial 5 year term.	The permitted warehousing, wholesaling and retail of truck tyres, tubes, batteries, lubricants and other associated auto products. Tyre fitting and servicing of motor vehicles and trucks and office and administrative purposes associated herewith as well as tyre reprocessing operation.
29 Saleyards Road, Ōtāhuhu - Front	Existing tenant	5 Years with 1x 5 Year right of renewal, subject to a 6 month Landlord-side termination clause after the initial 5 year term.	Truck stop filling station
29 Saleyards Road, Ōtāhuhu - Rear	To Be Confirmed – new tenant to be sought	5 Years with 1x 5 Year right of renewal, subject to a 6 month Landlord-side termination clause after the initial 5 year term.	Yard storage

13. New leases will provide security of tenure for the tenants, enabling them to invest in their businesses and thrive, or alternatively put them in a better position to sell their businesses if needed as they can sell their interest in the lease as part of the business sale.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

14. Following the Workshop held on 26 February 2025, the local board raised concerns about the current business uses and their effect on the environment. Eke Panuku have included supplementary clauses which will be inserted into each lease that have more stringent conditions for air quality, hazardous waste disposal, erosion and sediment control. The supplementary clauses are additional to the standard lease terms which cover Corporate Responsibility (including ‘Zero Waste’ and reducing carbon emissions) and Sustainability and Efficiency. The additional clauses are attached to this report as ‘Attachment A’.

15. These leases are for a reasonably short term, being five years before the Landlord can take back possession of the Land if needed. The uses are not changing from existing, so the impact on the environment is no greater than current.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

16. Auckland Council Parks and Places (Specialist Operations) are managing the future Portage Route Project. They have been contacted throughout the lease negotiation process to confirm the likely timing on the project. Upon recent consultation (October 2024), we have been advised that five year lease terms should not have any effect on the project timelines as they are still waiting for funding to be allocated.

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

Local impacts and local board views

17. A public notice was placed in the New Zealand Herald and on the Auckland Council Have Your Say Website on 6 March 2025. Submissions will be accepted up to and including 6 April 2025. To date, no submissions have been received since publication.

18. A Workshop with the local board was held on 26 February 2025 to discuss the intention to grant the new leases. The local board were supportive of the new leases as long as the 6 month termination right was included after the initial 5 year terms to ensure flexibility if the Portage Route project was brought forward. The local board also requested additional protections for the environment which have been covered under the Climate Impact Statement.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

19. Iwi Consultation is required for all new leases under the Reserves Act 1977. The affected iwi who have been contacted on this matter are Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Paoa, Ngaati Tamaoho, Ngāti Tamaterā, Ngaati Te Ata, Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei, Ngāti Whātua Kaipara, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, Te Ākitai Waiohua, Te Ahiwaru, Te Kawerau ā Maki and Waikato Tainui.

20. Feedback was sought on the proposed new leases on 5 March 2025 and submissions close on 6 April 2025. Eke Panuku has so far received one submission from Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust, but it was requesting information about the process to repurpose the reserve.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

21. Eke Panuku has completed market rental valuations for each new lease. All of these have resulted in net rent increases to current rents being paid. This is because many of the leases have been rolling over for many years under old rent amounts.

22. Market rent reviews will be carried out at the specified intervals under each new lease to ensure that tenants are paying an appropriate amount of rent throughout their lease terms.

23. Entering new commercial leases for these sites will not only increase revenue for council, but it will also provide a guaranteed income stream.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

24. If new leases are not entered, there is a lost opportunity for council to generate a market rental and secure future revenue streams for each of the properties. As the properties are non-service (not currently required for a council service purpose) they are being managed with the purpose of generating a commercial income until such a time as they are required for a future service purpose. The future service purpose is currently the Portage Route Project.

25. As noted under Council Group Impacts, entering new, fixed term leases will mean that council is unable to use the properties for service purposes during the fixed period that the lease is not determinable by the 6 month notice clause. This is the initial five years. This risk is considered acceptable as the timeframe for the Portage route project is estimated to be at least five years away due to funding availability.

26. As noted under Climate Impact Statement, the risk to the environment is being managed by inserting additional clauses into the leases which specifically address hazardous waste, air quality and erosion and sediment control.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

27. Eke Panuku will update the local board of the outcome of the public consultation and iwi engagement process.

28. Eke Panuku will finalise negotiations with the tenants and have the new leases fully executed.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a⇩	Additional Lease Clauses for the Ōtāhuhu Canal Reserve Leases	67

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Rose Smits - Property Manager

Authorisers

Sharleen Devereux - Property Manager

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Tāmaki Makaurau Streets for People – Māngere Cycleway Trials – Coronation Rd Phase Two (Kiwi Esplanade to Church Street)

File No.: CP2025/06257

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. This report seeks endorsement from the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board to make permanent the Māngere Cycleway Trial – Coronation Road Phase Two (Kiwi Esplanade to Church Street).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. Auckland Transport (AT) have completed trial projects in Onewherowhero (Kelston) and Māngere through the NZTA Waka Kotahi ‘Streets for People’ programme. These projects aimed to use new ways of working with local communities and stakeholders to inform, design, build, adapt, and activate infrastructure that get more people walking and cycling.

3. In Māngere, AT partnered with Māngere community groups (Time To Thrive trust, and I AM Māngere) to investigate, design, communicate, and deliver two cycleway projects; Coronation Road from Nga Hau Māngere to Māngere Bridge Village, and Robertson Road in front of Māngere Centre Park to Bader Drive.

4. On 15 November 2023, the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolved (Resolution number MO/2023/167) to:

a) endorse AT moving to the next phase of the Streets for People trial projects which included implementation, adaptation, and monitoring and evaluation.

5. On 19 June 2024, the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolved (Resolution number MO/2024/72) to:

a) endorse AT’s recommendation to retain the Robertson Road cycleway, making it a permanent part of the transport network

b) endorse AT's recommendation to retain the Māngere Bridge to Māngere Village cycleway on Coronation Road, incorporating the proposed design changes to increase usage. Additionally, support a trial extension on Coronation Road (between Kiwi Esplanade and Church Street) to address concerns raised by local residents during the evaluation phase.

6. On 17 October 2024, the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board resolved (Resolution number MO/2024/141) to:

a) endorse AT’s recommendation to retain the gate at Coronation Rd and Waterfront Rd, making it a permanent part of the transport network

b) endorse AT’s recommendation to change the operations of the gate from on-site security services to an on-call service.

7. As a result of the 19 June 2024 endorsement AT has now completed the adaptation, monitoring and evaluation of the trial extension (referred to as Coronation Rd Trial Phase Two) and seeks endorsement from the Local Board for the decision to retain the Phase Two infrastructure as it currently is.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) ohia / endorse AT’s recommendation to retain the Māngere Cycleway Trial – Coronation Rd Trial Phase Two (Kiwi Esplanade to Church Street).

b) tuhi tīpoka / notes the ongoing commitment from Auckland Transport to support local Māngere community groups such as the Time to Thrive trust and I AM Māngere to inform, educate, and activate local people to increase walking and cycling trips across the network in Māngere.

Horopaki

Context

8. Through Streets for People, thirteen councils across Aotearoa worked on 19 projects that will make it safer, easier, and more attractive for people to walk, ride bikes or scooters and take public transport, and to improve road safety and routes to schools.

9. The projects involve quick, low-cost, scalable improvements that help create safe, people-friendly spaces in their neighbourhoods. In Tamaki Makaurau this is done through trial projects that inform permanent changes planned for the future. This approach to projects is called “adaptive urbanism”. The projects also allow AT to use new ways of working with local people and stakeholders to influence the ‘business as usual’ approach to delivering transport infrastructure going forward.

10. Māngere was selected as a location for Streets for People due to the significant investment proposed through the Māngere West Cycling Improvements and Māngere East Cycling Investment over the next six years. Collectively these projects link the isolated pieces of cycling infrastructure, such as Te Ara Mua future streets in Māngere. The proposed network is shown in the map below.

11. On the cycleway near Ngā Hau Māngere the nearby AT fixed cycle counter showed that the average daily number of riders was around 300-400 weekdays, and around 600 on weekends.

Figure 1 – Current and future cycle facilities network map.

12. The Streets for People trial projects included intensive community collaboration and engagement, this opportunity to work together and collaborate on active mode outcomes in Māngere achieved a key goal of the programme to collaborate with and empower local people to achieve positive change in their neighbourhoods.

13. AT has now completed three significant trials in Māngere under the Streets for People programme. The Robertson Road cycleway project, which runs from Māngere Centre Park to Bader Drive, endorsed by the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board to become a permanent part of the transport network on 19 June 2024. The Coronation Road cycleway project, extending from Ngā Hau Māngere to Māngere Bridge Village, also received partial endorsement for retention (Stage 1 – from Ngā Hau Māngere to Waterfront Rd and Stage 2 from Waterfront Rd to Kiwi Esplanade on 19 June 2024) with Phase Two trial extension from Kiwi Esplanade to Church Rd finishing in February 2024. Additionally, the Ngā Hau Māngere Bridge - Anti Social Behaviour (Gate) project that was added to the programme by the Local Board at the intersection of Coronation Road and Waterfront Road was endorsed to be retained as a permanent feature, with a change in operations from on-site security services to an on-call service on 17 October 2024.

14. The changes made to Coronation Road cycleway during Phase Two of the trial aimed to address feedback received in Phase One of the trial.

Figure 2 – Phase One vs Phase Two layout and key changes.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

15. For the Coronation Road Trial Phase Two (Kiwi Esplanade to Church Street) monitoring and evaluation phase, more than 160 people attended the five events (including pit stops, rides, and whanau-friendly gatherings) hosted by the project team. Our project team included TTT and I AM Māngere and their mahi was key to the number of local people attending and the overall success of events.

16. Team completed a series of fourteen 45-minute observation sessions that were conducted over nine days between 18 December 2024 and 22 February 2025.

17. Video footage was also recorded during Phase Two of the trial for one week in January 2025, capturing data from 7.30am to 5:30pm daily. This footage was compared with data collected in May/June 2024 during Phase One. The analysis measured the volume of different road users at various times of day, their direction of movement, and any conflicts between them.

18. The data collected showed that cycleway use increased in both directions (north and southbound) during Phase Two, with the most significant change among southbound riders. Phase Two provided a continuous southbound cycleway on the east side, leading to an increase in usage—from 33% of all southbound riders in Phase One to 73% in Phase Two. Northbound use of the cycleway also increased from 50% to 61%. Overall, the share of people on bikes choosing the cycleway over the road or footpath grew from 43% to 66%. The busiest times were weekends before 2pm and weekday afternoons (4–5 pm).

Figure 3 – Phase One vs Phase Two rider locations.

19. The data collected, through observations, showed that people on bikes of all ages and types—including commuters, schoolchildren, and recreational riders—showed a strong preference for the cycleway over the road or footpath.

Figure 4 –User types and where they cycled, based on observations during Phase Two.

20. For Phase Two, feedback responses were collected online via the ‘Have Your Say’ platform from 20 December 2024 to 24 February 2025. The project team also invited people attending whānau-friendly activation events to complete the survey in person. A shorter version of the survey was available for young riders. In addition, intercept surveys were conducted with people on bikes near the trial area. In total, the following responses were received:

· 49 online responses

· 60 in-person responses

· 1 postal response

· 10 young rider responses

21. Perception responses from the survey showed that 59% of respondents had used the cycleway. When asked how they travel on Coronation Road between Kiwi Esplanade and Church Road, many respondents reported using multiple modes, with 48% driving, 78% biking, and 41% walking. Most survey respondents felt the Phase Two layout was more useful for people on bikes and scooters, and half said they were more likely to use it themselves.

22. Sentiment responses from the survey provided an opportunity for comments, which were analysed to identify common themes. The most common theme in the feedback was that Phase Two improved on Phase One. Many respondents found the new layout more useful, intuitive, enjoyable, and safer. A smaller group of respondents felt the cycleway was unnecessary, citing low traffic speeds, limited volume of users, or other funding priorities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

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

24. One of AT’s core roles is in providing attractive alternatives to private vehicle travel, reducing the carbon footprint of its own operations and, to the extent feasible, that of the contracted public transport network.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

25. This project is led by AT, but the project areas – Onewherowhero (Kelston) and Māngere – and benefits were developed with input from Auckland Council and Eke Panuku.

26. Local Boards are key stakeholders and collaboration partners for the projects and AT looks to use learnings from these projects to influence how we work with local boards on other transport projects.

27. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu local board plays a crucial role in local transportation decision making. The AT team has endeavored to consult with the local board to make key decisions throughout this process, ensuring a smooth transition from planning to implementation to close out of the trials. This collaborative approach has focused on local needs and priorities so that they can be effectively addressed through this trial process.

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

Local impacts and local board views

28. The trial changes have been shaped by the ideas and insights of a group of local people with a broad range of perspectives and connections to local organisations, businesses and community groups.

29. Our door-knocking of properties adjacent to the trial found some support for the trial, with a small group of residents concerned about the trial changes. We continued to communicate with these properties and other local stakeholders throughout the trial monitoring and evaluation phase.

30. We have engaged closely with the Local Board throughout the trial. At the outset, some members had concerns about trialing cycleways in their community. We have continued to work with the local board to address concerns and build trust in the process.

31. For the Streets for People projects, AT committed to getting formal endorsement at two points in the project from the Local Board whose area the project is in. These were endorsement to proceed from design to implementation, and endorsement to support the final retention decision. In this way AT wants to show the commitment to local voices in transport decision making and the valuable knowledge the local board’s hold.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

32. AT has worked closely with Kathleen Wilson from Te Ākitai Waiohua on these projects. There is an aligned kaupapa between the project and iwi by working with local people to guide the projects, but to also show how locals can be involved more widely and influence future strategy and investment in their community.

33. The project team also provides regular updates to the AT Southern Hui as part of the wider AT cycling programme updates, where other Mana Whenua can contribute or comment.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

34. These projects, including the activations, pump tracks, cycle parking and events were 90% funded by NZTA Waka Kotahi. AT contributed the other 10% from active mode project budgets in the area.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

35. There is low risk identified with this project and therefore low risk to the local board in endorsing this project.

36. Any future risks and mitigations post the project will be notified to the local board through regular meeting updates

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

37. All components of the Streets for People Māngere trial cycleway projects are now complete. This resolution seeks support to retain the Phase Two section of cycleway between Kiwi Esplanade and Church Road on the Ngā Hau Māngere to Māngere Bridge Village project.

38. It is expected that no physical changes to the street are required upon endorsement of Māngere Cycleway Trial – Coronation Road Phase Two (Kiwi Esplanade to Church Street) by the Māngere Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

39. The project team will collaborate with the AT maintenance team to investigate the road surface and seal at this location and aim to improve it during the next scheduled maintenance upgrade.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Allyn Sims - Programme Manager - Streets for People Programme

Authorisers

Melanie Alexander - Programme Owner, People-Powered Streets Programmes, Auckland Transport

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025

File No.: CP2025/05918

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To adopt the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025, which provides guidance on emerging play issues and opportunities for non-playground play projects.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 provides Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board with general information and specific project suggestions to increase the range of play opportunities it offers.

3. The play plan has been developed with community and council staff guidance. The local board has provided feedback on an earlier draft of the document. The final version of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 is now offered to the local board for adoption.

4. A Supplementary Information document has also been provided as Attachment B. It includes relevant demographic information for the local board area, and insights from Regional Sports Trusts and the council’s Advisory Panels. This information has informed the advice staff provide to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board regarding play.

5. The play plan does not commit the local board to funding any particular play project. Instead, it will serve as a tool to support work programme planning each year.

6. The report recommends that Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopt the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 and use it as a resource for the future development of play.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) whai / adopt the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 as set out in Attachment A to the agenda report

Horopaki

Context

7. Auckland Council’s play advocacy function promotes play opportunities beyond investment in traditional playgrounds, with play regarded as ‘an everywhere activity’.

8. The play advocacy approach complements local boards’ capital investments in play. It does not however replace the ongoing need for investment in playgrounds.

9. Staff engaged with Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board at various workshops in 2023 and 2024. A play advocacy activity was included in the local board’s annual work programme in the 2024/2025 financial year.

10. In the 2024/2025 work programme, staff committed to delivering a ‘play plan’ for Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board. This document provides advice on how play outcomes can be achieved with operational expenditure (OPEX) funding. It also provides guidance on relevant play issues that the local board might like to consider.

11. A draft version of the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 was circulated to the local board in December 2024. Staff attended a local board workshop in January 2025 to receive elected member feedback, which was incorporated into the final draft. Staff are seeking adoption of the plan which is attached to the report as Attachment A.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

12. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2024 (‘the play plan’) is aligned with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2023. It is intended to be a live document for the life of the local board plan. The play plan will be revised throughout the 2026 – 2029 term of the local board.

13. The play plan complements previous staff advice about play and other council work programmes that provide play outcomes. This includes play provision assessments and play network gap analyses completed by the Specialist Operations team, and the activation programme delivered by the Out and About Auckland team.

14. The play plan highlights the need to engage effectively with rangatahi regarding play. The gap in play provision for rangatahi is well known across Tāmaki Makaurau, and the play plan offers suggestions about how this can be addressed through both operational (OPEX) and capital (CAPEX) investment.

15. Accessible play is a growing focus within the play sector. The play plan provides guidance to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board about the different needs of tamariki with invisible and visible disabilities. It also discusses ways that the council can address these groups’ play requirements.

16. All-ages play is also a topic of interest to most local boards. The play plan addresses this by highlighting opportunities for intergenerational play. It also advocates for greater engagement with rangatahi to learn more about this demographic’s play interests. It provides some suggestions for ways to better provide play for rangatahi and adults in formal play spaces.

17. The play plan presents elected members with specific project ideas to increase play provision across Māngere-Ōtāhuhu, and suggestions of local board advocacy for broader play outcomes. The project suggestions are indicative only and do not commit the local board to funding any particular project. Language has been added to the play plan to this effect.

18. In response to feedback from a range of local boards, all play plans have been revised as follows:

· a Chair’s Message has been included at the beginning of the document

· operational details such as proposed project costs have been removed, to better reflect the strategic nature of the play plan and the local board’s governance-level decision-making role

· a page has been inserted to acknowledge the opportunity for play to support the wellbeing of older adults

· the document has been divided into two separate parts: the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025, which is action-focused; and the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 Supplementary Information document, which includes supporting insights and other reference materials.

19. Staff will use the play plan to inform discussions during work programme development. Each year, the local board may choose to allocate a budget toward play through its annual work programme development process.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

20. The play advocacy approach has an enduring positive climate impact. It encourages whānau to embrace their streets, local parks and public spaces as sites for play. This reduces the need to drive to playgrounds.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

21. The play plan has been written with input from the council’s Activation and Events teams within the Community Wellbeing department. Further review and feedback has been provided by staff in the Pools and Leisure and the Parks and Community Facilities departments.

22. The play plan highlights the value of integrating play into other council work programmes, and in the work of Council-Controlled Organisations like Auckland Transport and Watercare.

23. The Supplementary Information document includes insights from the council’s various Advisory Panels, which each represent different groups in the community. Staff engaged directly with the Advisory Panels and sought their feedback regarding play issues relevant to them.

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

Local impacts and local board views

24. Play is of perennial interest to the wider community, with most families aware of its benefit to their tamariki. As freedom to roam and play without adult supervision has declined for tamariki in Tāmaki Makaurau during the past three decades, there has been growing pressure on the council to build and maintain playgrounds. The play advocacy approach, as set out in the play plan, both acknowledges the importance of playgrounds, and offers other ways to provide opportunities to play.

25. Tāmaki Makaurau’s four Regional Sports Trusts have the capacity to engage directly with tamariki in a school setting, and the Play Leads at each Regional Sports Trust have done so at several primary schools. The insights gathered have informed staff advice to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board about how to provide play beyond a playground setting. In particular, tamariki voice has identified a widespread appetite for more adventurous play.

26. The Supplementary Information document contains demographic information from the 2023 Census, highlighting changing ethnic demographics in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu. Analysis of the local board’s demographic data has contributed to staff advice to Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

27. The play plan references the Māori outcomes identified in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Plan 2023. It highlights several ways that play can support Māori outcomes, including:

· using Te Aranga Māori Design principles in the design of playgrounds, to communicate iwi narratives through colour choices, cultural motifs, and other elements

· developing and installing māra hūpara – Māori playgrounds that draw on pre-colonial play traditions from local iwi

· exploring ways that the Te Kete Rukuruku dual naming project could create opportunities for playful interpretation of the narratives behind gifted te reo names

· providing Māori play activations through the Out and About Auckland programme.

28. The play plan acknowledges the importance of taking an iwi-led approach for any play provision that is aligned with Māori outcomes.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

29. Although the play plan includes potential play projects, it is not a prescriptive document and does not commit the local board to funding any of the projects. Language has been included in the play plan to make this clear to all readers.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

30. The following table identifies risks associated with Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board adopting its play plan and sets out appropriate mitigation measures.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

31. Staff will participate in annual work programme planning, drawing on the play plan to advise the local board of project opportunities.

32. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 will be revised on a three-year basis, to ensure it remains aligned with the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board’s local board plan.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Play Plan 2025 Supplementary Information (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Jacquelyn Collins - Play Portfolio Lead

Authorisers

Pippa Sommerville - Manager Sport & Recreation

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Public feedback on proposal to amend dog policy and bylaw

File No.: CP2025/06593

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal to amend matters of regional significance in the Auckland Council Dog Policy and Bylaw.

2. To delegate one or more local board members to represent local board views on the public feedback to the Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Staff have prepared a summary of public feedback to enable the local board to provide its views on how the Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal to amend matters of regional significance in the Dog Policy and Bylaw.

4. The Governing Body adopted a proposal to amend matters of regional significance in the Kaupapa mo ngā Kurī | Policy on Dogs 2019 and Ture a Rohe Tiakina Kurī | Dog Management Bylaw 2019 in December 2024, and appointed a Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel to consider all public feedback and make recommendations, before a final decision is made.

5. The proposal to adopt an amended policy and bylaw seeks to improve council’s approach to dog management in Auckland by minimising the risk of danger and distress to people, stock, poultry, domestic animals and protected wildlife, nuisance to people, damage to property and environment, risk of not meeting the needs of dogs and their owners and the inherent risk of conflict between users of shared spaces in Auckland.

6. Council received responses from 5,207 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 23 February 2025. All public feedback is summarised in Attachment A. Feedback related to the local board area is in Attachment B. A user-friendly view of the feedback related to the local board by proposal can be viewed on council's AKHaveYourSay web page.

7. All feedback is summarised by the following topics:

· Proposal 1: Limit to number of dogs walked (six on leash, with maximum three of the six off leash at any one time)	· Proposal 12B: Muriwai Regional Park
· Proposal 2: Auckland Botanic Gardens	· Proposal 12C: Tāwharanui Regional Park
· Proposal 3: Hunua Ranges Regional Park	· Proposal 12D: Wenderholm Regional Park
· Proposal 4: Long Bay Regional Park	· Proposal 13A: Restructure the policy to more clearly show its goal, focus areas, council actions, and rules
· Proposal 5A: Mahurangi Regional Park East	· Proposal 13B: Clarify rule that all dogs classified as menacing must be neutered
· Proposal 5B: Mahurangi Regional Park West	· Proposal 13C: Clarify who can provide behavioural assessments in relation to menacing dog classifications
· Proposal 5C: Mahurangi Regional Park Scott Point	· Proposal 13D: Clarify what areas in Auckland require a license to keep multiple dogs on a property
· Proposal 6: Pākiri Regional Park	· Proposal 13E: Clarify how dog access rules are set
· Proposal 7: Shakespear Regional Park	· Proposal 13F: Clarify Auckland-wide dog access rules
· Proposal 8: Tāpapakanga Regional Park	· Proposal 13G: Clarify or correct errors in Policy Schedule 2: Dog access rules
· Proposal 9: Te Ārai Regional Park	· Proposal 13H: Remove outdated information in Policy Schedule 2: Dog access rules
· Proposal 10: Waitawa Regional Park	· Proposal 13I: Update dog access rules for Tūpuna Maunga (ancestral mountains)
· Proposal 11: Whakanewha Regional Park	· Proposal 13J: Remove outdated/duplicated bylaw content
· Proposal 12A: Ambury Regional Park

8. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Panel should address feedback from people in the local board area, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel. Taking this approach will assist the Panel in making recommendations to the Governing Body about whether to adopt the proposal.

9. There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited group of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

10. Local boards can (if they wish) present their views to the Panel on 23 May 2025. The Panel will consider local board views and all public feedback before making recommendations to the Governing Body in June 2025. The Governing Body will make a final decision mid-2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback from people in the local board area to the Governing Body proposal to amend matters of regional significance in the Auckland Council Kaupapa mo ngā Kurī | Policy on Dogs 2019 and Ture a Rohe Tiakina Kurī | Dog Management Bylaw 2019 in the agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel should address public feedback to the proposal in (a) to assist the Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint a replacement to any appointed member in (c) who is unable to present to the Panel.

Horopaki

Context

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on public feedback

11. The local board in accordance with council’s collaborative governance model^{^[1]} now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal.

12. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Panel at a meeting scheduled for 23 May 2025.

13. The nature of the local board views is at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board:

ü could indicate support for matters raised in public feedback

ü could recommend how the Policy and Bylaw Panel address matters raised in public feedback

û should not express its views on the proposal itself (that opportunity was provided prior to public consultation, the focus now is on how to respond to public feedback).

Council is required to have a policy on dogs and a bylaw to implement the policy

14. The Dog Control Act 1996 requires Auckland Council to have a policy on dogs and a bylaw to give effect to it by specifying rules that dog owners must comply with.

15. Council’s objective is to ‘keep dogs a positive part of the life of Aucklanders’ by:

· maintaining opportunities for owners to take their dogs to public places

· adopting measures to minimise the problems caused by dogs (including by promoting responsible dog ownership)

· protecting dogs from harm and ensuring their welfare.

16. The rules are enforced by the Animal Management unit using a modern regulator approach to compliance (for example information, education and enforcement).

17. The policy and bylaw are part of a wider regulatory framework that includes the following:

· The Dog Control Act 1996 manages matters relating to dog ownership, including their care, control and owner responsibilities for damage caused by their dog.

· The Animal Welfare Act 1999 ensures that owners of animals and persons in charge of animals attend properly to the welfare of the animal.

· The Code of Welfare for Dogs 2018 provides information to the owners and persons in charge of dogs about the standards they must achieve to meet their obligations under the Animal Welfare Act 1999.

The Governing Body proposed amending matters of regional significance in the policy and bylaw for public feedback

18. On 12 December 2024, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to amend matters of regional significance in the Auckland Council Kaupapa no ngā Kurī / Policy on Dogs 2019 and Ture ā Rohe Tiakina Kurī / Dog Management Bylaw 2019 (GB/2024/181). It also appointed a Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel to consider all public feedback and make recommendations, before a final decision is made by the Governing Body.

19. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Dog Policy and Bylaw (see figure below).

20. The proposal seeks to improve council’s approach to dog management in Auckland by minimising the risk of danger and distress to people, stock, poultry, domestic animals and protected wildlife, nuisance to people, damage to property and environment, risk of not meeting the needs of dogs and their owners from irresponsible dog ownership and the inherent risk of conflict between users of shared spaces in Auckland.

21. The main proposals are outlined in the Table below:

Main proposals
Set a limit to the number of dogs a person may ‘walk’ in a council-controlled public place at one time (maximum of six dogs of which no more than three may be under control off a leash at any one time)
Auckland Botanic Gardens · Change the off-leash area to align with the current signposted off-leash boundaries, to provide for temporary changes for events and to transition to on-leash as parts of the off-leash area are developed in accordance with the Gardens Master Plan. · Prohibit dogs from waterways. · Prohibit dogs from the Huakaiwaka Visitor Centre, Café area (except the western café terrace), designated food concession areas and Potter Children’s Garden. · Clarify rules in other areas.
Hunua Ranges Regional Park · Prohibit dogs from tracks and roads that connect to the Kohukohunui track, the Kokako Management Area and Piggott’s Habitat and on single use mountain bike tracks (currently on-leash).
Long Bay Regional Park · Amend the summer daytime rule for the beach south of Vaughan Stream from on-leash to prohibited (off-leash access before 10am and after 5pm in summer and at any time in winter unchanged). · Clarify rules in other areas, including access to beach from southernmost carpark and prohibited tracks and bays.
Mahurangi Regional Park · Prohibit dogs on Cudlip Point Loop Track (currently on-leash). · Allow dogs on-leash at all times at Scott Point (currently on-leash time and season). · Clarify rules in other areas (including dogs prohibited at Mahurangi Regional Park (East) and heritage grounds at Scott Point.
Pākiri Regional Park · Prohibit dogs on the associated beach.
Shakespear Regional Park · Apply an on-leash time and season rule to the open grass areas between Army Bay and Okoramai Bay (currently off-leash). · Clarify rules in other areas (such as boundary of Army Bay and Okoramai Bay beaches, on-leash tracks and prohibited areas).
Tāpapakanga Regional Park · Provide off-leash access on beach and on-leash access on area between beach and car park at any time (currently prohibited during lambing season) · Clarify rules in other areas (such as prohibited at the campgrounds and bach, and during lambing).
Te Ārai Regional Park · Prohibit dogs on Forestry Beach (Te Ārai Beach South to Pakiri Beach) and associated coastal tracks. · Clarify access to off-leash area at disused quarry.
Waitawa Regional Park · Change eastern part of Mataitai Beach from off-leash to on-leash. · Change Waitawa Beach from off-leash to on-leash. · Prohibit dogs on single use mountain bike tracks. · Clarify other areas where dogs are prohibited (such as farm paddock during lambing, campground and bach).
Whakanewha Regional Park · Provide on-leash access on tracks from Omiha (Rocky Bay) to the on-leash area of the Park.
Ambury, Muriwai, Tāwharanui and Wenderholm regional parks · Clarify current rules (no change to dog access).
Reorganise, simplify and clarify Policy and Bylaw content, including: · using a goal, focus area, action and rule structure · clarifying approach to setting dog access rules · clarifying the policy to neuter classified dogs and who can provide behavioural assessments · clarifying Auckland-wide dog access rules such as for council carparks and camping grounds, working dogs, dogs in vehicles and private ways · removing outdated information in Schedule 2 for example outdated landmarks · updating dog access rules on Tūpuna Maunga (ancestral mountains) · removing Bylaw content that is covered in the Policy or is outdated.

Main proposals

Set a limit to the number of dogs a person may ‘walk’ in a council-controlled public place at one time (maximum of six dogs of which no more than three may be under control off a leash at any one time)

Auckland Botanic Gardens

· Change the off-leash area to align with the current signposted off-leash boundaries, to provide for temporary changes for events and to transition to on-leash as parts of the off-leash area are developed in accordance with the Gardens Master Plan.

· Prohibit dogs from waterways.

· Prohibit dogs from the Huakaiwaka Visitor Centre, Café area (except the western café terrace), designated food concession areas and Potter Children’s Garden.

· Clarify rules in other areas.

Hunua Ranges Regional Park

· Prohibit dogs from tracks and roads that connect to the Kohukohunui track, the Kokako Management Area and Piggott’s Habitat and on single use mountain bike tracks (currently on-leash).

Long Bay Regional Park

· Amend the summer daytime rule for the beach south of Vaughan Stream from on-leash to prohibited (off-leash access before 10am and after 5pm in summer and at any time in winter unchanged).

· Clarify rules in other areas, including access to beach from southernmost carpark and prohibited tracks and bays.

Mahurangi Regional Park

· Prohibit dogs on Cudlip Point Loop Track (currently on-leash).

· Allow dogs on-leash at all times at Scott Point (currently on-leash time and season).

· Clarify rules in other areas (including dogs prohibited at Mahurangi Regional Park (East) and heritage grounds at Scott Point.

Pākiri Regional Park

· Prohibit dogs on the associated beach.

Shakespear Regional Park

· Apply an on-leash time and season rule to the open grass areas between Army Bay and Okoramai Bay (currently off-leash).

· Clarify rules in other areas (such as boundary of Army Bay and Okoramai Bay beaches, on-leash tracks and prohibited areas).

Tāpapakanga Regional Park

· Provide off-leash access on beach and on-leash access on area between beach and car park at any time (currently prohibited during lambing season)

· Clarify rules in other areas (such as prohibited at the campgrounds and bach, and during lambing).

Te Ārai Regional Park

· Prohibit dogs on Forestry Beach (Te Ārai Beach South to Pakiri Beach) and associated coastal tracks.

· Clarify access to off-leash area at disused quarry.

Waitawa Regional Park

· Change eastern part of Mataitai Beach from off-leash to on-leash.

· Change Waitawa Beach from off-leash to on-leash.

· Prohibit dogs on single use mountain bike tracks.

· Clarify other areas where dogs are prohibited (such as farm paddock during lambing, campground and bach).

Whakanewha Regional Park

· Provide on-leash access on tracks from Omiha (Rocky Bay) to the on-leash area of the Park.

Ambury, Muriwai, Tāwharanui and Wenderholm regional parks

· Clarify current rules (no change to dog access).

Reorganise, simplify and clarify Policy and Bylaw content, including:

· using a goal, focus area, action and rule structure

· clarifying approach to setting dog access rules

· clarifying the policy to neuter classified dogs and who can provide behavioural assessments

· clarifying Auckland-wide dog access rules such as for council carparks and camping grounds, working dogs, dogs in vehicles and private ways

· removing outdated information in Schedule 2 for example outdated landmarks

· updating dog access rules on Tūpuna Maunga (ancestral mountains)

· removing Bylaw content that is covered in the Policy or is outdated.

22. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 20 January until 23 February 2025.

23. Council received feedback from 5,186 people and 30 organisations (5,207 in total)

· 4,046 on the proposal to limit the number of dogs walked and the general policy and bylaw matters and

· 3,084 on the proposal to clarify or change regional park dog access rules.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

24. A total of 103 people from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area provided feedback to the proposal.

25. There was majority support for proposals to reorganise, simplify and clarify Policy and Bylaw content, and the proposal to clarify dog access rules at Wenderholm Regional Park, split support for proposals to change or clarify dog access rules at Auckland Botanic Gardens, Waitawa and Ambury Regional Parks, and majority opposition for the proposal to limit the number of dogs walked and the remaining proposals to change or clarify dog access rules at other regional parks.

26. Key themes from the Auckland-wide feedback highlighted concerns with limiting the number of dogs and clarifying or changing the dog access rules at most of the regional parks.

27. While some proposals may not be supported, public feedback also seeks alternatives other than the status quo. For example:

· for Proposal 1: limit to number of dogs walked, of the 66 per cent (2,397) of Auckland-wide feedback opposed to the proposal:

o six per cent (146) supported a limit of four dogs, with no more than two off-leash

o five per cent (113) supported a limit of four dogs, with no more than two off-leash unless licence obtained

o four per cent (100) supported a limit of eight dogs, with no more than four off-leash

o 638 comments (around 30 per cent) supported introducing a dog walker license for qualified dog walkers.

· for proposed changes to regional park rules, Auckland-wide individuals who opposed the changes:

o generally wanted council to provide more dog-friendly or off-leash areas

o some were not opposing the proposals, but instead expressing the view that the current rules are too restrictive.

Overview of local board area and Auckland-wide support for proposed changes

Topic (Proposals P1 – P13)		Local board feedback		Auckland-wide feedback
Topic (Proposals P1 – P13)		Support	Opposition	Support	Opposition
P1	Limit the number of dogs walked (six on leash, with maximum three of the six off leash at any one time)	29 per cent	71 per cent	33 per cent	66 per cent
P2	Auckland Botanic Gardens	46 per cent	49 per cent	34 per cent	62 per cent
P3	Hunua Ranges Regional Park	36 per cent	55 per cent	33 per cent	56 per cent
P4	Long Bay Regional Park	26 per cent	74 per cent	26 per cent	70 per cent
P5A	Mahurangi Regional Park East	13 per cent	88 per cent	27 per cent	62 per cent
P5B	Mahurangi Regional Park West	13 per cent	88 per cent	28 per cent	60 per cent
P5C	Mahurangi Regional Park Scott Point	14 per cent	86 per cent	29 per cent	61 per cent
P6	Pākiri Regional Park	0 per cent	100 per cent	15 per cent	81 per cent
P7	Shakespear Regional Park	22 per cent	78 per cent	39 per cent	51 per cent
P8	Tāpapakanga Regional Park	33 per cent	50 per cent	34 per cent	55 per cent
P9	Te Ārai Regional Park	22 per cent	78 per cent	18 per cent	76 per cent
P10	Waitawa Regional Park	50 per cent	50 per cent	30 per cent	61 per cent
P11	Whakanewha Regional Park	14 per cent	43 per cent	35 per cent	51 per cent
P12A	Ambury Regional Park	50 per cent	45 per cent	37 per cent	55 per cent
P12B	Muriwai Regional Park	41 per cent	53 per cent	46 per cent	47 per cent
P12C	Tāwharanui Regional Park	36 per cent	55 per cent	43 per cent	45 per cent
P12D	Wenderholm Regional Park	50 per cent	30 per cent	42 per cent	44 per cent
P13A	Restructure the policy to more clearly show its goal, focus areas, council actions, and rules	71 per cent	18 per cent	71 per cent	17 per cent
P13B	Clarify rule that all dogs classified as menacing must be neutered	71 per cent	15 per cent	81 per cent	13 per cent
P13C	Clarify who can provide behavioural assessments in relation to menacing dog classifications	91 per cent	3 per cent	83 per cent	6 per cent
P13D	Clarify what areas in Auckland require a license to keep multiple dogs on a property	65 per cent	24 per cent	74 per cent	17 per cent
P13E	Clarify how dog access rules are set	73 per cent	15 per cent	75 per cent	13 per cent
P13F	Clarify Auckland-wide dog access rules	76 per cent	18 per cent	76 per cent	17 per cent
P13G	Clarify or correct errors in Policy Schedule 2: Dog access rules	68 per cent	15 per cent	67 per cent	12 per cent
P13H	Remove outdated information in Policy Schedule 2: Dog access rules	74 per cent	12 per cent	80 per cent	9 per cent
P13I	Update dog access rules for Tūpuna Maunga (ancestral mountains)	56 per cent	32 per cent	49 per cent	26 per cent
P13J	Remove outdated or duplicate bylaw content	79 per cent	9 per cent	81 per cent	7 per cent

Note: percentages do not add up to 100. For example, ‘I don’t know’ responses are not included in Table.

28. The proposal, proposed policy and bylaw can be viewed in the links. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area to meet council’s statutory requirements is in Attachment B. A more user-friendly view that consolidates the comments from all public feedback related to the local board by proposal can be viewed on council's AKHaveYourSay web page.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

29. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Governing Body Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel on 23 May 2025.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

30. The Dog Policy and Bylaw do not directly address the climate change goals in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan. For example, the Policy and Bylaw focuses more on keeping dogs as a positive part of the lives of Aucklanders.

31. There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

32. The Dog Policy and Bylaw impacts the operations of several council departments, including Animal Management, Biodiversity, Regional Parks and Natural Environment teams. Relevant staff are aware of the impacts of the proposal and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views https://aklcouncil.sharepoint.com/sites/how-we-work/SitePages/report-writing-guidelines.aspx - local-impacts-and-local-board-views

33. The Dog Policy and Bylaw impact local governance and are of high interest.

34. Views from all local boards on a draft proposal were sought in October 2024 and are summarised in the 3 December 2024 Regulatory and Safety Committee agenda (Attachment C to Item 11).

35. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement https://aklcouncil.sharepoint.com/sites/how-we-work/SitePages/report-writing-guidelines.aspx - m%C4%81ori-impact-statement

36. The Dog Policy and Bylaw support manaakitanga, whanaungatanga and kaitiakitanga in the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and the Schedule of Issues of Significance by providing regulations that help protect people and the environment from harm caused by dogs.

37. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

38. Six per cent (369) of the public feedback received was from people who identified as Māori. Of that feedback:

· 74 per cent (166) did not support the proposal to limit the number of dogs that could be walked, with 58 per cent preferring no change to the current rule

· there was general overall support (more than 50 per cent) to reorganise, simplify and clarify the Policy and Bylaw content, however there was less support (47 per cent) to update dog access rules for Tupuna Maunga (ancestral mountains)

· there was generally opposition to proposed changes to regional park dog access rules

39. Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust supported the majority of the proposals to simplify and clarify the Policy and Bylaw content and proposed changes to Long Bay, Mahurangi, Pākiri, Shakespear, Tāwharanui, Te Ārai and Wenderholm Regional Parks.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. There are no financial implications arising from decisions sought in this report. Costs associated with the special consultative procedure and Dog Policy and Bylaw implementation will be met within existing budget.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited number of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. The Governing Body Dog Policy and Bylaw Panel will consider all local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body in June 2025. The Governing Body will make a final decision mid-2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Summary of public feedback to the proposed changes to the dog policy and bylaw (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Public feedback from people in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area (Under Separate Cover)

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kylie Hill - Principal Policy Advisor Regulatory Practice

Authorisers

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Public feedback on proposed changes to cemetery bylaw

File No.: CP2025/06397

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board views on how the Governing Body Bylaw Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal to amend Auckland Council’s Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw and to revoke the Code of Practice.

2. To delegate one or more board members to present those views to the Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. Staff have prepared a summary of public feedback to enable the local board to provide its views on how the Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal to amend the Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw and revoke the Code.

4. The Governing Body adopted a proposal to amend the Auckland Council Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 and to revoke the Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014.

5. The proposal seeks to improve council’s administrative efficiency, and to better minimise public safety risks, cemetery misuse, obstruction, and damage to property, heritage and the environment through structural changes to the Bylaw and Code framework.

6. Council received responses from 33 people and organisations at the close of feedback on 23 February 2025. All feedback is summarised by the following topics:

· Proposal 1: Use a bylaw to set cemetery rules and to revoke the Code of Practice.

· Proposal 2: Clarify when council approval is required (2A) and to clarify rules about adornments (2B), maintenance (2C), preparing a casket or shroud for burial and cremation (2D) and monument work and physical works (2E).

· Proposal 3: Update the bylaw structure, definitions, and wording for clarity.

7. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the appointed Governing Body Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel should address feedback from people in the local board area. Taking this approach will assist the Panel in making recommendations to the Governing Body about whether to adopt the proposal.

8. There is a reputational risk that the feedback from the local board area is from a limited number of people and does not reflect the views of the whole community. This report mitigates this risk by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

9. Local boards can (if they wish) present their views to the Panel on 13 June 2025. The Panel will consider board views and all public feedback before making recommendations to the Governing Body in June 2025. The Governing Body will make a final decision in mid-2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tūtohi / receive the public feedback from people in the local board area to the Governing Body proposal to amend the Auckland Council Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 (Bylaw) and to revoke Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014 (Code) in the agenda report.

b) whakarato / provide its views on how the Governing Body Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel should address public feedback to the proposal in (a) to assist the Panel in its deliberations.

c) whakatuu / appoint one or more local board members to present the views in (b) to the Governing Body Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel.

d) tuku mana / delegate authority to the local board chair to appoint a replacement to any appointed member in (c) who is unable to present to the Panel.

Horopaki

Context

The local board has an opportunity to provide its views on public feedback

10. The local board in accordance with council’s collaborative governance model^{^[2]} now has an opportunity to provide its views on how the Governing Body Bylaw Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal.

11. Local board views must be provided by resolution to the Panel. The local board can also choose to present those views to the Panel at a meeting scheduled for 13 June 2025.

12. The nature of the local board views is at the discretion of the local board but must remain within the scope of the proposal and public feedback. For example, the local board:

ü could indicate support for matters raised in public feedback

ü could recommend how the Policy and Bylaw Panel address matters raised in public feedback

û should not express its views on the proposal itself (that opportunity was provided prior to public consultation, the focus now is on how to respond to public feedback).

The Bylaw and Code help to manage council cemeteries and crematoria

13. To help manage council cemeteries and crematoria, council uses the Ture ā-Rohe mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw 2014 (Bylaw) and Arataki Tikanga mo ngā Wāhi Tapu me ngā Whare Tahu Tupāpaku | Cemeteries and Crematoria Code of Practice 2014 (Code).

14. The Bylaw and Code seek to minimise public safety risks, cemetery misuse, distress to families, obstruction, and damage to property, heritage and the environment at council cemeteries and crematoria (not for example, ash scattering in public places).

15. Council operates approximately 29 active (operational) and 26 inactive (no new plots for sale; no longer in regular use; function as local parks) cemeteries. This includes cemeteries with crematoria at Waikumete, Manukau Memorial Gardens and North Shore Memorial Park.

16. The Governing Body has delegated authority to make, amend and revoke the Code to the Regulatory and Safety Committee, and to administer the Bylaw and Code to cemetery and Aotea Great Barrier Island staff and the Waikumete Urupā Komiti.^{^[3]}

17. The Bylaw and Code form part of a wider regulatory and strategic framework including the:

· Burial and Cremation Act 1964 that enables council to provide cemetery services

· Cremation Regulations 1973 that regulates cremations

· Health (Burial) Regulations 1946 that regulates funeral directors, mortuaries, burials at sea, handling and transportation of dead bodies and approved disinfectants

· Burial and Cremation (Removal of Monuments and Tablets) Regulation 1967 that provides for the removal of dilapidated or neglected monuments and tablets

· Auckland Unitary Plan^{^[4]} that regulates activities at cemeteries to protect heritage^{^[5]}, meet the needs of the community, maintain or enhance the local environment and amenity values and to protect conservation values and natural qualities of open space conservation zones (which include non-operational cemeteries).

The Governing Body has proposed amending the Bylaw and revoking the Code

18. On 12 December 2024, the Governing Body adopted a proposal to amend the Bylaw and revoke the Code for public consultation (GB/2024/182). A Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel was appointed to consider all public feedback and make recommendations to the Governing Body before a final decision is made (RSCCC/2024/82).

19. The proposal arose from a statutory review of the Bylaw and Code (see Figure below).

20. The proposal seeks to improve council’s administrative efficiency, and to better minimise public safety risks, cemetery misuse, obstruction, and damage to property, heritage and the environment through structural changes to the Bylaw and Code framework.

21. Main proposals in comparison to the current Bylaw and Code are outlined in the table below.

Main proposals

Use a bylaw to set cemetery rules in a way that allows cemetery staff to manage the daily operation of council cemeteries and crematoria, and to revoke the Code of Practice.

Clarify rules about when council approval is required and about adornments, maintenance, and preparing a casket for burial and cremation.

Update the bylaw structure, definitions, and wording for clarity.

22. The proposal was publicly notified for feedback from 20 January until 23 February 2025. Council received feedback from 31 people and two organisations (total of 32).

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

23. A total of two people from the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area provided feedback to the proposal.

24. There was majority support for Proposals 1 and 3, and parts of Proposal 2 (clarify when council approval is required, rules about adornments, maintenance and preparing a casket or shroud for burial or cremation), and split support to clarify rules about monument work and physical works (Proposal 2E).

25. This is generally consistent with the Auckland-wide feedback where there was majority support for all three proposals.

Overview of local board area and Auckland-wide support for proposed changes

Topic (Proposals P1 to P3)		Local board feedback		Auckland-wide feedback
Topic (Proposals P1 to P3)		Support	Opposition	Support	Opposition
P1	Use a bylaw to set cemetery rules and to revoke the Code of Practice	67 per cent	0 per cent	85 per cent	15 per cent
P2A	Clarify when council approval is required	67 per cent	0 per cent	85 per cent	4 per cent
P2B	Clarify rules about adornments	67 per cent	0 per cent	63 per cent	17 per cent
P2C	Clarify rules about maintenance	67 per cent	0 per cent	86 per cent	4 per cent
P2D	Clarify rules about preparing a casket or shroud for burial and cremation	67 per cent	0 per cent	96 per cent	0 percent
P2E	Clarify rules about monument work and physical works	33 per cent	33 per cent	79 per cent	7 per cent
P3	Update the bylaw structure, definitions, and wording for clarity	67 per cent	0 per cent	85 per cent	11 per cent

Note: percentages do not add up to 100. ‘I don’t know’ responses are not recorded in Table.

26. The proposal, proposed bylaw and current bylaw and code can be viewed in the links. A summary of all public feedback is in Attachment A and a copy of all public feedback related to the local board area is in Attachment B.

Staff recommend the local board provide its views on public feedback

27. Staff recommend that the local board provide its views on how the Governing Body Panel should address public feedback from people in the local board area to the proposal by resolution, and if it wishes, present those views to the Panel on 13 June 2025.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

28. The proposal does not directly address the climate change goals in Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan. For example, the proposal focuses on ensuring that memorials do not cause safety risks and adornments do not obstruct maintenance, rather than regulating the climate impact of common practices. There are no implications for climate change arising from decisions sought in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

29. The proposed changes impact the Cemetery Services and the Aotea Great Barrier Island service centre which provide council cemetery services.

30. Relevant staff input was sought to inform the statutory bylaw review, options and proposal, and staff are aware of the impacts of the changes and their implementation role.

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

Local impacts and local board views

31. Based on the agreed principles and processes in the Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws 2019, views from interested local boards were sought on draft options and proposal.

32. In October and November 2024, 12 interested local boards provided formal views on draft options and a proposal. A summary of local board views can be viewed in the 3 December 2024 Regulatory and Safety Committee agenda (Attachment C to Item 10).

33. This report provides an opportunity to give local board views on how the Governing Body Cemeteries and Crematoria Bylaw Panel should address matters raised in public feedback to the proposal, before a final decision is made.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

34. The proposal supports whanaungatanga, rangatiratanga, manaakitanga and kaitiakitanga in Houkura / the Independent Māori Statutory Board’s Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau and the Schedule of Issues of Significance by providing regulation that supports council services to meet social, cultural and physical needs, and supports the role of the Waikumete Urupā Komiti (Komiti) at Te Urupā o Waikumete (Waikumete Cemetery).^{^[6]}

35. Mana whenua and mataawaka were notified of the proposal and given the opportunity to provide feedback through face-to-face meetings, in writing, online and in-person.

36. Six per cent (two) of the total responders identified as Māori.

37. Both supported the proposal to amend the Bylaw, remove the Code, update the Bylaw structure, definitions and wording and to clarify rules about when council approval is required and about adornments, maintenance, and preparing a casket for burial and cremation.

38. One disagreed with clarifying the rules about monument and physical works, noting that other cultures may disagree with what is a culturally acceptable New Zealand monument and suggested that a maximum size be placed on monuments to ensure compliance.

39. Both commented on the adornments. One about the mess associated with plastic adornments, and the other about what are suitable materials to hold flowers.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

40. The cost of the public consultation and implementation of the proposal (if adopted) will be met within existing budgets.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

41. The following risk has been identified:

If...	Then...	Mitigation
The feedback from the local board area is from a limited number of people.	The feedback may not reflect the views of the whole community.	This risk is mitigated by providing local boards with a summary of all public feedback.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

42. On 13 June 2025 the Panel will consider all formal local board views and public feedback on the proposal, deliberate and make recommendations to the Governing Body in mid-2025. The Governing Body will make a final decision.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Summary of public feedback to the proposed changes to the cemetery bylaw	97
b ⇩	Public feedback from people in Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board area	117

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Kylie Hill - Principal Policy Advisor Regulatory Practice

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Proposed changes to the draft Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy

File No.: CP2025/06391

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek local board endorsement of the amended Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy following public consultation.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. On 10 December 2024, the Policy and Planning Committee approved public consultation on the draft of Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy [PEPCC/2024/131 and PEPCC/2024/132].

3. A total of 402 pieces of feedback were received, through consultation and a People’s Panel survey. Overall, there is strong support for the draft strategy but also opportunities to make changes. A detailed feedback report is provided in Attachment A.

4. Having considered public feedback, as well as local board resolutions on the draft strategy, staff propose changes to the draft strategy, the most significant being:

· more explicitly emphasising the importance of equity and accessibility in providing open spaces and play, sport and recreation opportunities (including in the strategic directions, investment principles and policies)

· greater emphasis on the importance of environment and biodiversity outcomes (including in the investment principles and Policy one)

· greater emphasis on the purpose and benefits of regional parks (in Policy two)

· including the capacity-focused approach (Option package two) for open space provision standards (in Policy two)

· refining the strategic directions based on a range of other consultation feedback

· making the decision-making responsibilities of local boards clearer

· clarifying the meaning of ‘value for money’

· providing clearer direction in the policy section to ensure local boards receive the necessary advice for decision-making

· clarifying that the council attempts to acquire land early in the development process as budget is available.

5. The proposed changes are reflected in the amended strategy (see final draft in Attachment B with track changes).

6. Local boards have called for a better understanding of local impacts. Staff have developed examples of implementation scenarios, existing good practices and potential local applications of the new open space provision standards (see Attachment C), noting that much of how the strategy is implemented is at the discretion of each local board.

7. In addition, staff are working with local board advisors to scope how advice to local boards could be improved to deliver on the strategy. To date, we have identified potential improvements: consolidating information provided to local boards, involving local boards earlier in planning processes, improving alignment between regional and local planning cycles, funding and budgets and providing information on trade-offs (see Attachment D).

8. The Policy and Planning Committee will consider adopting the final amended strategy in May 2025. The agenda report will contain the local board resolutions.

9. If the final amended strategy is adopted, staff will develop an implementation and monitoring plan, including tools and guidance, to support delivery by local boards and the Governing Body. Staff will also continue to scope improvements to local board advice.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) ohia / endorse the final amended Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy in Attachment B

b) ohia / endorse updating the open space provision standards in the strategy with Option package two – capacity-focused approach: provide more open space than currently enabled in high- and medium-density areas where residents have low or moderate levels of provision.

Horopaki

Context

The draft strategy outlines how we will provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities

10. As a regional public policy, the draft of Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy sets the strategic directions we seek to achieve for open space, sport and recreation in Auckland and against which we will monitor progress. It forms a unifying roadmap for the council group to deliver and for other non-council organisations and community groups to contribute.

11. It brings together five existing strategies, policies and plans and provides a refreshed and consolidated approach to planning and investment. It aims to provide open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to benefit all Aucklanders, now and in the future, to improve the health of Tāmaki Makaurau.

The development of the draft strategy was supported by an advisory structure

12. The development of the draft strategy was informed by a strong evidence base and supported by an advisory structure that met regularly to provide input and direction.

13. The advisory structure includes the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group (featuring two councillors, two local board members and one Houkura member), an advisory and Māori rōpū (with mana whenua, mataawaka and sector representatives) and key kaimahi from across the council group.

14. Local boards were also engaged throughout the development of the draft strategy via memos, presentations, briefings, workshops and business meetings (refer Attachment A, pages 3-4).

Gathering Aucklanders’ views provides an opportunity to further refine the draft strategy

15. On 10 December 2024, the Policy and Planning Committee approved public consultation on the draft strategy [PEPCC/2024/131 and PEPCC/2024/132].

16. Consultation was designed to seek Aucklanders’ views on the draft strategy and identify any relevant questions, concerns or additional information to strengthen or modify it.

17. Consultation took place from 10 February to 10 March 2025 and was advertised on Our Auckland and in libraries. Staff also requested that local board engagement advisors and key stakeholders share the consultation opportunity with their communities and networks. The engagement approach involved online submissions via the Have Your Say project page, by email or postal mail, as well as in person drop-in sessions at libraries and Pasifika Festival and hui with the demographic advisory panels, key stakeholders and mataawaka.

18. Staff also ran a People’s Panel survey in December 2024.

19. The five topics we asked for feedback on were:

· Where we are heading (strategic directions)

· Our approach to investment (investment principles)

· Making the most of our open spaces (policy one)

· Providing the right open spaces in the right places (policy two), including two options for open space provision outlined below

· Supporting Aucklanders to be more active more often (policy three).

20. The consultation included the following two option packages to update the open space provision standards:

· Option package one – High-density focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high-density areas

· Option package two – Capacity focused: provide more open space than currently enabled in high- and medium-density areas where residents have low or moderate levels of existing provision.

21. These two option packages are explained in more detail from paragraph 31.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

The consultation feedback shows we are on the right track

22. We received 149 pieces of consultation feedback, as well as 253 responses to the People’s Panel survey. Attachment A provides a detailed summary of the feedback.

23. Submitters included members of the public, a range of partners and stakeholders (including organisations such as Aktive, Forest and Bird, Healthy Auckland Together, Property Council New Zealand and Te Whānau o Waipareira) and members of the council’s demographic advisory panels.

24. There is strong support for:

· the draft strategy overall

· the five draft strategic directions, with the highest support for Strategic direction five: support Aucklanders to live healthy, active lives

· the four draft investment principles, with the highest support for investment principle one: taking a benefits-led approach to improve the holistic wellbeing of people, places and the environment

· all three policies, with the highest support for Policy one: making the most of our open spaces.

25. Overall, submitters prefer a capacity-focused approach (Option package two) – taking an equity lens to deliver more open space where it is needed most in high- and medium-density areas – rather than a high-density-focused approach (Option package one) – delivering more open space in high-density areas – for open space provision standards.

26. Analysis of the qualitative feedback outlined a range of key themes:

· open and green spaces are essential for mental and physical health

· all Aucklanders must have access to safe, well-maintained open spaces

· open space planning needs to be an integral part of urban planning

· open spaces must serve a wide range of functions

· our resources should be used efficiently.

Staff propose changes to the draft strategy in response to the feedback

27. Staff considered the feedback received and are proposing amending the strategy as a result (see Attachment A, pages 38-47).

28. A summary of the most significant proposed changes is shown in Table One. In addition, staff have made minor changes to address specific feedback, clarify intent and meaning or update technical information.

Table One: Proposed changes to the draft strategy based on consultation feedback

· More explicitly emphasise the importance of equity and accessibility in the strategy on pages 7, 8, 11, 34, 46, 81, 82, 85 and in the glossary

· Include greater emphasis on the importance of environment and biodiversity outcomes on pages 14, 20, 25, 29, 31, 44, 45 and 46

· Include greater emphasis on the purpose and benefits of regional parks on page 78

· Include the capacity-focused approach (Option package two) for open space provision standards and delete the high-density focused approach (Option package one) on pages 46, 48, 49 and 52

· Refine the strategic directions based on a range of other consultation feedback on pages 11, 12 and 14.

Staff also propose changes to the draft strategy in response to local board resolutions

29. Staff have also amended the draft strategy in response to local board feedback received in November and December 2024. The key changes are presented in Attachment A (pages 48-49) and summarised in Table Two below.

Table Two: Proposed changes to the draft strategy in response to local board feedback

· Make the decision-making responsibilities of local boards clearer, moving the table previously on page 23 to page 9

· Clarify the meaning of ‘value for money’ in the strategy on page 17 and in the glossary

· Provide clearer direction in the policy sections to ensure local boards receive the necessary advice for decision-making on page 28

· Clarify that the council attempts to acquire land early in the development process on page 58.

30. All proposed changes are included in track changes in the amended strategy (Attachment B).

Staff recommend a capacity-based approach to open space provision standards

31. As part of the strategy development, staff are proposing updated provision standards for pocket parks and neighbourhood parks to provide better open space outcomes in high- and medium-density areas and greenfield areas. The provision standards help us to ensure we are providing the right open spaces in the right places so Aucklanders can play, be active and enjoy nature.

Summary of option packages analysis – for more details refer CP2025/06391

A report to local boards and to the Policy and Planning Committee in late 2024 provided detailed analysis of the two option packages. Staff recommended Option package two as the preferred option.

Both packages are outlined below. They reflect different ways of adding to our existing open space network across Auckland to continue serving the needs of a growing population.

Density	Park type	Current provision standards	Option package one: High-density focused	Option package two: Capacity focused (recommended)
High-density areas or other areas developed to an equivalent density	Pocket parks	1000-1500m² provided at no capital cost to the council	1000-1500m² acquired at cost to the council regardless of capacity	1000-1500m² in areas with moderate or low capacity acquired at cost to the council
	Neighbourhood parks (within 400m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	5000m² regardless of capacity	2000m² to 5000m² depending on capacity
Medium-density areas	Pocket parks	No pocket parks	1000-1500m² provided at no capital cost to the council
Medium-density areas	Neighbourhood parks (within 400m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	No change	2000m² to 5000m² depending on capacity
Low-density areas	Neighbourhood parks (within 600m walking distances)	3000m² to 5000m²	3000m²

Urban density is based on the Auckland Unitary Plan zones. Varying provision standards based on planned intensification levels enables us to better provide according to the likely demand for public open space, as well as likely private open space provision levels.

The capacity measure is a proposed addition to the existing policy. While the quantity of open space provision per capita is not a meaningful metric in isolation, it provides a basis of comparison when considering future provision across Auckland’s urban areas. There is no accepted international or national capacity standards. Based on local observations and international examples, we propose that capacity is considered low when below 10m² of open space per person, moderate when between 10 and 20m² and high when more than 20m².

Both packages involve trade-offs, as shown below.

	Trade-offs
Option package one High-density focused	Delivers more open space in high-density areas than current policy but larger parks might be difficult to acquire due to land ownership and cost. Is a simple standard to understand but not tailored to where provision is most needed.


Option package two Capacity focused	Is more affordable than Option package one but does not deliver the same level of additional open spaces in high-density areas. Takes an equity lens by focusing provision where most needed but is more complicated to understand and apply.

32. To illustrate how the two open space provision option packages would apply on the ground, staff have developed some case studies (with maps), which are provided in Attachment C.

Consultation feedback supports the capacity-based approach

33. Overall, respondents expressed the importance of open space for mental and physical wellbeing and their desire for open space provision to be an integral part of neighbourhood planning. Feedback highlighted the importance of taking an equity lens to open space provision, targeting areas where it is needed most.

34. Consultation feedback (see Attachment A, page 33) shows an overall preference for a capacity-focused approach to open space provision (Option package two). The support for Option package 2 amongst Have Your Say submitters is similar across Auckland, and slightly higher in the north area.

Figure One: Preference for open space provision standards

35. Stakeholders and partners also favour Option package two over Option package one.

36. Property Council New Zealand, however, expressed concerns that either package was too rigid and that they would increase the cost of the council’s development contributions levy and ultimately development. The development sector also wishes for more delivery partnerships with the council. This can be investigated at implementation stage.

37. Based on previous analysis and consultation feedback, staff recommend that the final amended strategy includes Option package two.

Staff will continue work to support implementation of the strategy

38. Both local boards and the Governing Body have decision-making responsibilities for the provision of open space, sport and recreations services and assets.

39. Staff have developed examples of local board planning and delivery scenarios and case studies of what good practice looks like (see Attachment C). They provide an overview of how key parts of the strategy could be applied locally and examples of things that are already being done well and we would like to see more of. These are included to aid local board understanding of what delivery could look like. How the strategy would be implemented if adopted would be at the discretion of local boards and the Governing Body in accordance with their decision-making responsibilities.

40. Following feedback from local boards on the draft strategy prior to consultation, staff have been working with local board advisors and operational staff to understand opportunities to improve advice and support to local boards for implementation of the strategy.

41. The multitude of documents, information and processes owned and managed by a range of teams across the council currently makes it difficult to provide concise, consistent and up-to-date advice to local boards. This impacts their ability to understand trade-offs and prioritise decisions to deliver for their communities.

42. Preliminary findings point to potential improvements, such as consolidating information provided to local boards, involving local boards earlier in planning processes, improving alignment between regional and local planning cycles, funding and budgets and providing information on trade-offs (see Attachment D).

43. Staff will continue investigating potential improvements to the advice local boards receive, which will inform the development of an implementation and monitoring plan for the strategy (if adopted).

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

44. The draft strategy considers how to adapt to the challenges posed by climate change and work to mitigate it, including by reducing emissions. One of the five strategic directions is to enhance our resilience to climate change and our contribution to mitigation, including through reducing carbon emissions, in line with Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri: Auckland's Climate Plan.

45. The draft strategy outlines what we will do to make this happen, including developing the blue-green network, accelerating the use of nature-based solutions, improving the environmental performance of our open spaces and facilities and adapting our open spaces and facilities on the coast and in flood-prone areas.

46. While we already contribute to this strategic direction, the draft strategy proposes a ’do more’ approach to implementation. This is in recognition of the significant impacts of climate change on Aucklanders now and in the future.

47. The investment approach in the draft strategy also includes a greater emphasis on identifying and quantifying the environmental benefits of our investment and designing initiatives to deliver multiple benefits, such as making recreation parks better able to support stormwater management.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

48. Kaimahi from across the council group have provided input throughout the development of the draft strategy.

49. Implementing the strategy will span across the investment areas identified in the council’s performance management framework.

50. If the final amended strategy is adopted, an implementation and monitoring plan will be developed to support delivery. Kaimahi from across the council group will continue to provide input into this plan.

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

Local impacts and local board views

51. Levels of support for the draft strategy was broadly similar among Have Your Say respondents across the region. Attachment A provides sub-regional breakdowns of the results.

52. Local boards have been engaged throughout the development of the draft strategy. Two local board members were in the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group: Member Sandra Coney and Member Margi Watson. In addition, staff provided memos and briefings and presented at workshops and business meetings.

53. Local boards provided resolutions on the draft strategy going for consultation at their November / December 2024 business meetings.

54. While there was general support for the strategic directions and investment principles in the draft strategy, local boards made a range of resolutions seeking better guidance from staff on open space matters, particularly the understanding of local impacts.

55. Staff have attempted to respond to local boards’ request for more targeted advice (see paragraphs 38 to 43 and Attachment C and Attachment D).

56. Local boards will consider how to deliver on the strategy, if adopted, as part of their local board plans and work programmes.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

57. The views of mana whenua and mataawaka have been sought throughout the development of the draft strategy.

· The Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group includes one Houkura member, first Tony Kake, replaced subsequently by Pongarauhine Renata.

· Both the advisory and Māori rōpū included mana whenua and mataawaka representatives. All iwi were invited to join the rōpū or engage in the manner that best suited them.

· Mana whenua and mataawaka organisations were kept up to date with progress and invited to provide feedback during the consultation process.

58. Guided by the Māori rōpū, the draft strategy incorporates a te ao Māori lens, one of the expectations of success set by the Governing Body and a key theme identified in the background paper. It is adapted from the te ao Māori framework developed for Te Tāruke-ā-Tāwhiri – Auckland Climate Plan, and builds on a single value, manaakitanga. It includes a focus on investing in ‘by Māori for Māori’ solutions, building the capacity and capability of mana whenua and mataawaka and partnering with mana whenua to co-design our spaces and places.

59. Consultation feedback on the draft strategy highlighted the importance of focusing on equity and addressing barriers to participation for Māori. This can be achieved by targeting investment, supporting Māori-led initiatives, aligning delivery with Māori health providers to improve overall wellbeing and providing spaces and places that are safe, affordable and accessible.

60. Feedback also called for embedding Māori leadership at decision-making and implementation levels, including support for co-governance arrangements which is reflected in the strategy.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

61. The strategy will be implemented using available budgets set during long-term plan and annual plan processes. When constrained by resourcing, the investment principles will support decision-makers in prioritising investment.

62. The draft strategy reflects the resource constraints faced by the council and the need to deliver value for money. The proposed investment approach emphasises the importance of establishing a robust evidence-based approach to investment and prioritisation to better support elected decision-makers.

63. Advice around investment in open space and sport and recreation will be based on a better articulation of costs and benefits, including in relation to local board plan priorities. This will be supported by a new tool to enable better identification, description and quantification of these benefits to help local boards prioritise investment.

64. Consideration of a broad range of funding and delivery tools will support implementation, including making the most of what we have, delivering differently and partnerships.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

65. Potential risks and mitigations are outlined below:

If…	Then…	Possible mitigations…
Local boards do not think the final amended strategy addresses their concerns	They will be less likely to support it, and the committee will be less likely to adopt it. Medium reputational, strategic and delivery risk.	· Staff have proposed changes to the draft strategy to reflect local board feedback. · Delivery of the strategy will be also supported by an implementation and monitoring plan. The three-yearly plan will set out what we will deliver and track progress against the five strategic directions. As part of this, staff are working to improve advice and support to local boards.
The final amended strategy does not provide clear enough direction to implementers	The strategy may not be incorporated into business as usual. Low reputational, strategic and delivery risk.	· Implementers provided regular input into development of the final amended strategy. · The implementation context, including financial constraints, has also informed the final amended strategy. · Staff are working with local boards on the advice and support they need for implementation. · Staff will continue to work with colleagues in planning for and supporting delivery, and monitoring progress.
The final amended strategy is perceived as unfunded.	Decision-makers may be less likely to adopt it. Medium financial, reputational and strategic risk.	· The final amended strategy sets strategic directions and investment principles to guide prioritisation and enable better informed discussions on future budget allocation.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

66. Staff will include local board views when seeking adoption of the strategy from the Policy and Planning Committee in May 2025. The five existing strategies, policies and plans forming Auckland Council’s open space, sport and recreation policy framework would be rescinded.

67. Staff will present the consultation feedback and proposed changes to the strategy to the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Joint Political Working Group at its meeting on 11 April 2025. Input and direction from the joint political working group will be reflected in the agenda report to the Policy and Planning Committee.

68. Staff will also present the consultation feedback and proposed changes to the strategy to the Local Board Chairs’ Forum on 14 April 2025.

69. If the final amended strategy is adopted, staff will develop an implementation and monitoring plan for committee’s approval. The plan will be developed with input from relevant staff across the council group, including Governance and Engagement. The plan would help embed the strategy’s investment principles into how we work, deliver on the strategic directions and monitor and evaluate delivery against the directions.

70. Local boards have significant decision-making responsibilities with regards to implementing the strategy at the local level. This involves delivering open spaces and sport and recreation opportunities to their communities in line with the strategy through development of their local board plans and work programmes.

71. Staff will continue working with local boards on improvements to advice, recognising that different local boards and / or clusters of local boards may require different and bespoke advice, and that the organisation is pivoting to support this.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Feedback analysis report (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Manaaki Tāmaki Makaurau: Auckland Open Space, Sport and Recreation Strategy (final draft version with track changes) (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Putting things into practice – scenarios, examples of good practices and applications of the two open space provision option packages (with maps) (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇩	Preliminary findings for improving advice to local boards	139

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Authors

Aubrey Bloomfield - Senior Policy Advisor

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Carole Canler - Senior Policy Manager

Louise Mason - General Manager Policy

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board views on the draft Contributions Policy 2025

File No.: CP2025/05021

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To invite local board views on the draft Contributions Policy 2025 for inclusion in the Governing Body decision report on 1 May 2025

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. The most-recent full review of the contributions policy, was completed and adopted in December 2021, based on the investments in the Long-term Plan 2021-2031. This was operational from 10 January 2022.

3. In April 2023, the Governing Body adopted the Contributions Policy 2022 Variation A which added investments over a 30-year period to support growth in Drury.

4. In June 2024, the council adopted its new Long-term Plan 2024-2034, which sets out capital expenditure plans for this period. The Contributions Policy 2025 now proposed for adoption reflects these decisions.

5. The draft Contributions Policy 2025 also includes investments over a longer time horizon for the Inner Northwest, and Auckland Housing Programme (AHPs) and to update the investments to be made in Drury beyond 2031. This follows through on the agreement in principle from December 2021 (FIN/2021/119) and subsequent noting in April 2023 (GB/2023/63).

6. The remaining Investment Priority Area (IPA), the City Centre/City Rail Link (CRL) stations, will be added as a next step later in 2025/early 2026 as more information becomes available, Also in this timeframe updates will be made for additional investments in Drury West, and stormwater in Mt Roskill and Māngere.

7. The Governing Body approved consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2025 in September 2024 and consultation took place from September to December 2024.

8. A memorandum and summary of feedback received from consultation was circulated to all local board and Governing Body members in February 2025. These are attached to this report as Attachment F.

9. This was followed up with Subject Matter Expert (SME) attendance at local board workshops as requested by individual local boards.

10. Any local board views agreed through this report will form an attachment to the decision-making report being presented to Governing Body on 1 May 2025.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tuku / provide views on the draft Contributions Policy 2025 for inclusion in the Governing Body decision report on 1 May 2025.

Horopaki

Context

11. Development contributions (DCs) allow for an equitable and proportionate share of the total cost of growth-related capital expenditure to be recovered from the development community. The Contributions Policy sets out how the council will recover from new development an appropriate and fair share of the cost of infrastructure investment attributable to growth.

12. Auckland's population has grown substantially over the 12 years to the end of 2024, from 1.4 million to over 1.8 million at an average of 1.4 per cent annually. It is forecast to continue to grow, with approximately 200,000 more Aucklanders expected by 2034. The population is expected to grow by a further 400,000 by 2054^{^[7]}.

13. To support the development enabled by the Auckland Unitary Plan, we are facing both immediate and longer-term demands for infrastructure in growth areas. If we do not adequately plan for the delivery and funding of this infrastructure, the cumulative effects of this development could lead to an unfair rates burden on future ratepayers or a risk of infrastructure shortfalls for future residents.

14. Auckland Council’s current contributions policy was introduced in January 2022 and later updated from June 2023 to extend cost recovery in Drury over a 30-year period instead of the previous 10-year approach.

15. Between September and November 2024, the council consulted on a proposal to adopt a new policy that incorporates updated capital expenditure from the Long-term Plan 2024-2034, revised growth and interest rate forecasts, adjustments to project costs, and extended investment planning for Drury.

16. The proposed policy also expands the 30-year cost recovery model to other Investment Priority Areas, including the Inner Northwest (Red Hills, Westgate, and Whenuapai) and Auckland Housing Programme (AHP) areas in Tāmaki, Māngere, and Mt Roskill. In addition, several smaller adjustments aim to ensure fairer cost distribution between ratepayers and developers.

17. The policy proposed for consultation included $10.3 billion in growth-related capital investment in the period to 2034, increasing the average development contribution from $21,000 to $30,000, while contributions in Drury would rise from $70,000 to $83,000. The proposed policy also provided for $10.9 billion of investment in Drury, Inner Northwest, and the AHP areas in the period beyond 2034. With these investments included the average DC price across the region would rise to $50,000. Different charges apply to different geographical areas based on the relevant activity funding areas in the proposal.

18. The Consultation Document (CD) provided to support consultation set out the key issues to be considered in assessing the proposal. The CD can be found at Attachment C. The key changes set out in consultation are summarised below.

Update for decisions in the LTP 2024-2034 and updates to Drury

19. The draft Contributions Policy 2025 that was consulted on updated the capital expenditure projects to reflect the decisions made since 2021 and the associated investment planned over the 10-year timeframe of the LTP.

20. The key changes include:

· Level crossings – Takanini ($550 million)

· Development of new town square in Henderson ($12.5 million)

· Waterview catchment separation ($59 million) – updated costs.

21. The current contributions policy included projects which are now funded as part of the NZ Upgrade Programme. Government decisions on the NZ Upgrade Programme had not been made at the time the Contributions Policy 2022 Variation A was adopted. We are now removing these projects from the policy as they are not expected to require council funding and there is no basis to recover any costs for them. Contributions collected for these projects to date will be re-allocated against similar projects within the same funding area.

22. The assessment of requirements for stormwater infrastructure in Drury has now been completed. This identified one project the council would need to deliver in addition to those that would be provided by developers as a condition of resource consent, and this has been included in the draft policy. Some adjustments have now also been made to the timing of projects including reducing investment and deferral of the timing of open space acquisitions. The assumptions made for investments in Drury over the longer horizon have also been reviewed based on the latest available information and the capital expenditure included in the policy has been updated. This includes updated land cost assumptions, alignment with the Cost Estimation guide published by Auckland Transport, and the latest growth forecasts. These changes raised the DC price for Drury that was consulted on from $70,000 to $83,000.

23. The draft policy will include a list of over 1,700 programmes and projects for which the council will seek to recover the growth share of costs through development contributions (see Attachment B).

24. The table below shows the total investments with a growth component in transport, stormwater, reserves, and community facilities over the LTP period and their funding source in the CD. In this analysis and that which follows later it is assumed that National Land Transport Fund from Waka Kotahi will fund 51 per cent funding of qualifying transport projects.

Funding source	CAPEX investment type $ millions
Funding source	Transport	Reserves	Community spaces	Stormwater	Total funding
Total NZTA/Waka Kotahi	3,569	0	0	0	3,569
Total rates	3,072	557	301	463	4,393
Total development contributions	893	1,005	127	309	2,334
Total CAPEX	7,534	1,562	428	772	10,296

25. As a result of the capital expenditure changes in the period to 2034, updated forecasts of NZTA/Waka Kotahi funding and dwelling construction, and adjustments to the investments in Drury before and after 2034 the weighted average development contributions price for a standard residential unit would rise from $21,000 under the Contributions Policy 2022, Variation A to $30,000 under the draft Contributions Policy 2025. The average price increase is driven by the increased level of investment within the LTP period in the Investment Priority Areas (IPA). This is a weighted average and varies widely by location depending on the investments the council plans to make to support growth in each area.

Inclusion of investments in IPA areas beyond 2034

26. The consultation proposed the addition of investments beyond 2034 to support growth in the IPA areas. The proposed investments and consequent changes to DC prices for each of the IPA areas is set out below.

Inner Northwest

27. The LTP provides for investment of $155 million in transport and $139 million in reserves between 2024 and 2034. The table below shows the investments with a growth component in transport, reserves, and community facilities beyond 2034 and their funding sources. No stormwater investment is required by the council as the nature of infrastructure needed in this area is such that it is expected to be delivered by developers as a condition of resource consent.

Total investments and funding source by activity in the Inner Northwest over a longer horizon $ millions
Funding source	Transport	Reserves	Community facilities
Total NZTA/Waka Kotahi	1,142	0	0
Total rates	558	118	82
Total development contributions	1,366	903	133
Total CAPEX	3,066	1,021	215

28. The additional funding requirement would increase the contributions price for the Inner Northwest from an average of $25,167 per household unit equivalent (HUE) to an average of around $98,000 per HUE when the investments beyond 2034 are added. Different charges apply to different geographical areas based on the relevant activity funding areas in the proposal. The proposed charges are set out in the table below.

Changes to funding area charges in the Inner Northwest over a longer horizon
Funding area	Current DC charge	Proposed DC for investments within the LTP period incl regional and sub-regional DCs	Proposed DC price for investments beyond LTP	Total proposed price including all investments incl regional and sub-regional DCs
Whenuapai	$25k	$27k	$75k	$102k
Redhills	$25k	$27k	$62k	$89k
Westgate	$23k	$34k	$61k	$95k

Māngere Auckland Housing Programme area

29. The LTP provides for investment of $46 million in transport and $23 million in reserves between 2024 and 2034. The table below shows the transport investments with a growth component beyond 2034 and their funding sources. Investments in stormwater infrastructure will be added in 2025 once further work is completed.

Total investments and funding source by activity in Māngere over a longer horizon $ millions
Funding source	Transport	Reserves	Community facilities
Total NZTA/Waka Kotahi	292	0	0
Total rates	531	0	0
Total development contributions	89	0	0
Total CAPEX	912	0	0

30. The additional funding requirement would increase the contributions price for the Māngere Auckland Housing Programme from an average of $18,123 per HUE to an average of around $29,000 per HUE when the investments beyond 2034 are added.

Mt Roskill Auckland Housing Programme area

31. The LTP provides for investment of $44 million in transport and $15 million in reserves between 2024 and 2034. The table below shows the transport investments with a growth component beyond 2034 and their funding sources. Investments in stormwater infrastructure will be added in 2025 once further work is completed.

Total investments and funding source by activity in Mt Roskill over a longer horizon $ millions
Funding source	Transport	Reserves	Community facilities
Total NZTA/Waka Kotahi	594	0	0
Total rates	677	0	0
Total development contributions	344	0	0
Total CAPEX	1,615	0	0

32. The additional funding requirement would increase the contributions price for the Mt Roskill from an average of $20,406, per HUE to an average of around $52,000 per HUE when the investments beyond 2034 are added. Different charges may apply depending on the combination of activity funding areas a development falls within. The primary driver of the higher DCs in the above range is the recovery of historic stormwater investments in the Inner West Triangle and the Waitematā Central funding areas.

Tāmaki Regeneration area

33. The LTP provides for investment of $76 million in transport, $67 million in stormwater, $87 million in reserves, and $1 million in community facilities between 2024 and 2034. The table below shows the investments with a growth component in transport, community facilities and stormwater beyond 2034 and their funding sources.

Total investments and funding source by activity in Tāmaki over a longer horizon $ millions
Funding source	Transport	Reserves	Community facilities	Stormwater
Total NZTA/Waka Kotahi	181	0	0	0
Total rates	194	0	41	18
Total development contributions	171	0	19	788
Total CAPEX	546	0	60	806

34. The standard of service for stormwater in Tāmaki has been planned to deliver the same level of service as in the Inner Northwest and Drury. This is higher than the service level presently provided by historical investment in the other brownfields areas that aren’t expected to develop. Accordingly, the scale of and cost of the investment required to redevelop the area is substantial.

35. The additional funding requirement would increase the contributions price for Tāmaki from $31,157 per HUE to $119,114 per HUE when the investments beyond 2034 are added.

Other proposed changes to the policy

Funding areas

36. Changes were proposed to funding areas to provide a more refined allocation of costs to development areas to better reflect beneficiaries of the planned infrastructure. The new proposed funding areas include:

· new sub-regional funding areas at Paerata, Whau, Inner Northwest

· a new local funding area at Avondale.

37. Changes to neighbouring funding areas were proposed to accommodate these new areas.

38. A number of other refinements were proposed to local and sub-regional funding areas to better reflect the beneficiaries of infrastructure. Details of these changes are included in Attachment E: Funding area maps.

Other changes

39. Some technical changes were proposed to the policy to clarify its intent and ensure fairness. Changes were highlighted in the draft policy in Attachment A.

40. Aside from the proposed changes discussed, the Contributions Policy 2022, Variation A was recommended as appropriate and fit for purpose and it was proposed to continue the unamended provisions in the current policy into the new policy.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

41. Key issues addressed in the CD related to the uncertainty inherent in taking a 30-year view of growth and the infrastructure investment required to support that along with the impact that higher DCs would have on current landowners planning to develop and whether higher DCs would impact on house prices. Key points made in the advice that supported the adoption of the draft policy for consultation on these issues is set out below. Further advice on these matters and other issues raised in consultation will form part of the advice to the council on 1 May.

42. The uncertainty associated with long-term planning is managed through the three-yearly review of our infrastructure planning priorities and funding through the council’s LTP. This allows the council to manage the risk of the pace of growth changing from our forecasts and consequent changes in the required infrastructure.

43. Continuing with a 10-year focus would continue the uncertainty for developers, landowners, and other infrastructure providers. It would also make it difficult to recover a fair share of the funding of expected capital expenditure in years 11-30 from early developers to address the longer-term cumulative impacts of their development. This would risk development occurring without adequate infrastructure and place more demand on future ratepayers.

44. These changes will not materially impact on house prices, which are driven by supply and demand and are not determined via a cost-plus methodology. That is, the developers are price takers. Their market power is limited, given they are part of a larger market, and their products are substitutable for near equivalents. Higher DC prices will eventually flow through to lower prices for raw land as the cost of enabling infrastructure is capitalised into the land value. However, they may have a short-term negative impact on the pace of development as developers respond to the change. Developers must absorb the cost into a lower land value. Depending on their financial position, they may either proceed with development, defer development and hold the land awaiting future value uplift, or on-sell the land to another developer. Staff consider that these short-term effects are outweighed by better cost signalling and associated longer-term benefits.

45. As these investments are being planned over decades, they are subject to refinement as investment plans are developed further, development intentions change, and economic conditions fluctuate. Future contributions policies will be updated as more refined information becomes available.

Consultation

46. Public consultation ran from 30 September to December 2024, featuring webinars, in-person events, and an opportunity for submitters to present directly to councillors.

47. Materials released to support consultation included the following documents attached to this report:

· Attachment A: Draft Development Contributions Policy 2025

· Attachment B: Schedule 8 Assets for which development contributions (DCs) will be used

· Attachment C: Consultation Document - Contributions Policy 2025

· Attachment D: How we set Development Contributions – Cost Allocation Methodology

· Attachment E: Funding area maps.

Feedback received

48. A total of 147 submissions were received, including 46 from organisations.

49. Key concerns raised included the impact of higher contributions on house prices and development, uncertainty around 30-year planning and cost escalation, the scale of stormwater investment in Tāmaki, delays in infrastructure investment, consideration of alternative funding sources, transparency of information, and specific issues with funding areas and projects.

50. A full analysis of the feedback can be found in Attachment F.

Updates for Final Policy for Adoption

51. Officers are analysing the points raised in the submissions. Advice on these points and further analysis conducted since the consultation process, including updated growth and economic forecasts, will be incorporated in advice to the Governing Body for decision making, planned for 1 May 2025. Potential changes to the proposed policy will also be presented at that time.

52. The Government has announced intended reforms to infrastructure funding and financing as part of the Going for Housing Growth policy program. The reforms are planned for implementation alongside council long-term plans in 2027. The exact form the reforms take will only be confirmed once legislation has passed. Staff consider that the Contributions Policy will still be required for at least the next two years and the council should continue with the updates and improvements proposed.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

53. Planning now for the funding of investments to support growth in the IPAs will ensure that the council is better able to deliver the infrastructure required for development in the IPAs to manage climate impacts of development and to connect to the rest of the city with a reduced climate impact. The proposal provides for early developers to meet a share of the costs of the infrastructure they will benefit from and create the need for, to address the cumulative impacts of growth.

54. If plans for securing a share of funding with DCs from early developers aren’t made now, greater demands will fall on future ratepayers to deliver this infrastructure. While adjustments can be made to the DC policy in the future these can’t retrospectively secure revenue from early developers. General rates are the only practical alternative funding source to make up this shortfall. Given the competing demands on general rates there is a real risk that all the funding required won’t be available in the future. This will mean the council won’t be able to deliver the level of investment required, leading to a greater negative climate impact.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

55. The information prepared for consultation on the draft Contributions Policy 2025 was developed in conjunction with the following council-controlled organisations and council units:

· Auckland Transport

· Public Law

· Policy

· Planning and Resource Consents

· Eke Panuku Development Auckland

· Healthy Waters and Flood Resilience

· Service Strategy and Partnerships

· Chief Economist Unit

· Spatial Analysis and Modelling.

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

Local impacts and local board views

56. The DC price varies by location depending on the cost of infrastructure required to support development in an area. These locations do not usually align to local board areas.

57. A local board briefing session was held on 30 September 2024 to brief members on this topic. Local boards have received a memorandum to update them on the review of the contributions policy and the feedback from public consultation. 18 local boards accepted an offer for workshop briefing sessions which were held in March. The purpose of this report is to seek local board views.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

58. Development contributions are assessed against the demand that different types of development generate on council infrastructure. Māori developments are assessed under broader development types based on the demand they generate. For example, kaumātua housing is treated the same as retirement villages, and marae are considered under community facilities.

59. Iwi authorities with mana whenua interests were contacted prior to the start of consultation to seek expressions of interest in discussing and providing feedback on the proposed changes. All iwi authorities were also notified when consultation opened, further advising of how they could have their say. The Mana Whenua forum and other council forums were advised of the consultation.

60. Seven submitters on the proposal identified as Māori. One response supported the proposed changes to update the policy for changes to the LTP and to reflect growth beyond 2034 in the IPA areas and four were opposed. In regard to the changes to Drury and the other changes proposed two were in favour and two against. The only comment received was that new development needs to be fully funded by developers.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

61. The Long-term Plan 2024-2034 assumes DCs revenue of $2.0 billion over the LTP period. After completing the analysis of the cost of investments in the LTP that can be recovered with DCs and the impact of the proposed policy changes, it was estimated that the revenue would be $2.6 billion. The achievement of this revised revenue forecast requires, as a first step, the implementation of a contributions policy updated for the capital expenditure decisions in the LTP, and the other changes proposed in this report.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

62. Forecasting long-term growth, infrastructure investment, and development contributions (DCs) carries risks, but these can be managed through the triennial long-term plans, policy adjustments, and reallocation or refunds of DCs if planned assets are not delivered.

63. There is a risk that projected development and DC revenue may not be met, which will be managed by monitoring consent applications and DC revenue.

64. The council ensures its contributions policy complies with legislation, but given the proposed increases in DCs, some developers may challenge the policy.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

65. The Governing Body will consider the feedback and updates to the proposed policy and make a decision on the final policy adoption on 1 May 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇨	Attachment A: Draft Development Contributions Policy 2025 (Under Separate Cover)
b ⇨	Attachment B: Schedule 8 Asset for which development contributions (DCs) will be used (Under Separate Cover)
c ⇨	Attachment C: Consultation Document - Contributions Policy 2025 (Under Separate Cover)
d ⇨	Attachment D: How we set Development Contributions – Cost Allocation Methodology (Under Separate Cover)
e ⇩	Attachment E: Funding area maps	151
f ⇩	Attachment F: Memorandum and Summary of consultation feedback	163

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Andrew Duncan - Manager Financial Policy

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board

16 April 2025

Allocation of decision-making responsibilities for council-controlled organisation activities coming in house

File No.: CP2025/06334

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To seek feedback from local boards on the proposed approach to allocating decision-making responsibilities between the Governing Body and local boards as part of Annual Budget 2025/2026 decisions. In particular, for urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities which move into Auckland Council as a result of council-controlled organisations (CCO) reform decisions.

2. To identify any additional matters requiring review.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

3. The CCO reform package in the Mayoral proposal, considered whether CCOs and the Auckland Council Group are structured in the best way to deliver on the long-term plan and its broader vision for Auckland. The goals of the reform included improving democratic accountability, strategic direction and council group effectiveness and efficiency.

4. In December 2024 the Governing Body confirmed structural changes to move urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities into Auckland Council no later than 1 July 2025.

5. This means that decision-making responsibility for the activities currently governed by the Eke Panuku and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) boards needs to be allocated by the Governing Body to either the Governing Body or local boards in accordance with section 17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009. This will be recorded in the allocation of decision-making table (allocation table) for inclusion in the Annual Plan 2025/2026.

6. For urban regeneration, staff recommend decision-making for the overall programme and associated budgets, and the city centre and waterfront programme sit with the Governing Body. Decision-making responsibility for implementing agreed priority location programmes would sit with local boards.

7. It is recommended that decision-making responsibility in relation to property and marina management also sit with the Governing Body, noting that further work is underway through the Group Property Review which might result in changes in the future.

8. In the future, new urban regeneration or development programmes could be established. The council proposes to undertake further work to clarify how these processes can best reflect the principle of subsidiarity.

9. For economic development activities staff do not consider that substantive changes to the existing allocation table are required. The allocation table already outlines that decisions on the regional economic development strategy, business improvement district (BID) policy, city centre and Auckland-wide economic development programmes sit with the Governing Body. Local boards have always held decision-making responsibilities for influencing local BID programmes, local economic development plans, projects and other local initiatives.

10. Staff are aware that legislative change is proposed to bring several Auckland Transport functions into the council parent and the matters covered in this report should assist with the process of allocation of those decisions to the Governing Body or local boards in the future.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board:

a) tuku / provide feedback on staff proposals relating to the allocation of decision-making responsibility for:

i. the urban regeneration and property management activities currently governed by the Eke Panuku board

ii. the economic development activities currently governed by the Tātaki Auckland Unlimited board

to either the Governing Body or local boards in accordance with section 17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009

b) tuhi tīpoka / note that staff recommendations and feedback from local boards will be considered at the Governing Body meeting on 29 May 2025 and associated changes to the allocation of decision-making table will be implemented as part of Annual Plan 2025/2026 decisions

c) tuhi tīpoka / note that further work is required in relation to determining the future decision-making allocation on:

i. funding of new priority urban regeneration or development locations as additional programmes are identified

ii. how anticipated demand from local boards for local economic development and urban regeneration advice is to be addressed

iii. property management decisions (undertaken as part of the Group Property Review)

d) tuku / provide feedback on any other matters requiring review.

Horopaki

Context

CCO reform decisions included moving urban regeneration, property and economic development activities in-house

11. The CCO reform included analysis on the rationale for and performance of the current CCO model, and structural reform options for three CCOs – Auckland Transport, Eke Panuku and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited. The goals of the reform are to improve:

i. democratic accountability over projects and services delivered to Aucklanders by CCOs

ii. strategic alignment between council decision making and what CCOs do for Aucklanders

iii. the effectiveness and efficiency of how the Auckland Council Group operates.

12. Decisions on CCO reform were made on 12 December 2024 (GB/2024/179) and included transferring and integrating urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities into council. Key reasons for this integration include:

· Urban regeneration – strengthening council’s ability to coordinate planning, strategy and delivery in a place-based way, including around strategic growth opportunities, large-scale developments and urban regeneration.

· Property management – improving processes for buying, managing and selling council assets and improving collaboration across the council group to achieve greater financial and strategic value from property assets.

· Economic development – increasing the council’s economic policy capability, identifying new opportunities and integrating advice on economic development issues into broader decision-making.

13. As a result, there may be some additional decisions to be made by the Governing Body or local boards, that were previously made by the Eke Panuku and Tātaki Auckland Unlimited Boards.

Legislation sets how decision-making is allocated, including the use of the subsidiarity principle

14. The basis on which decision-making responsibility is allocated is what is known as the subsidiarity principle, as set out in Section 17 of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009 (LGACA). This states that decision-making should be local unless the nature of the activity is such that decision-making on an Auckland-wide basis will better promote the well-being of communities across Auckland because:

· the impact of the decision will extend beyond a single local board area, or

· effective decision-making will require alignment or integration with other decisions (that sit with the GB), or

· the benefits of a consistent or co-ordinated approach across Auckland will outweigh the benefits of reflecting the diverse needs and preferences of the communities within each local board area.

15. The Governing Body is responsible for allocating decision-making responsibility for non-regulatory activities in accordance with the principles outlined above, after considering the views and preferences expressed by each local board. The allocation of decision-making responsibility is then recorded in the Decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and local boards Policy, which is included in each year’s Annual Plan (or the long-term plan every third year). The core part of this policy is what is generally known as the allocation table, which lists the non-regulatory activities for which the Governing Body and local boards have decision-making responsibility.

16. The allocation table, with proposed changes shown, is included at Attachment A. Also included at Attachment B is a list of the current Eke Panuku activities in the local board area, to provide current context.

17. These proposals were workshopped with the Governing Body on 26 March 2025 and a recording of that meeting was emailed to all local board members on 28 March and can be found here. The presentation is available here.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

18. This section is divided into the three key activities being transferred to Auckland Council: urban regeneration, property management and economic development. It outlines where decision-making responsibility currently sits or is proposed to sit and the rationale.

Allocation of decision-making responsibility for urban regeneration (new section in allocation table)

19. While activities that enable urban regeneration (such as planning, development streetscape improvements) are already covered in the allocation table, staff are proposing identifying urban regeneration as a stand-alone activity to enhance clarity.

20. Given the complexity and advanced state of council’s priority location urban regeneration programme, there is a need to minimise the risk of implementation being slowed down. Staff propose that this change is managed using the following principles:

· delivery of approved urban regeneration programmes will continue, using current business cases and detailed budgets (approved by the Eke Panuku board)

· the Governing Body will allocate budgets to these programmes.

21. The proposed allocations relate to current programmes and in part are in recognition that these must continue without issues despite the structural change. Further decisions will need to be made for new programmes that will be developed over time which cannot be accommodated prior to 1 July. This includes the governance and budget allocation of any new programmes.

Proposed additions to the allocation table

22. The principles set out in Section 17 of the LGACA (set out at Paragraph 14 above) have been applied to existing urban regeneration activities. Table One sets out the proposed additions to the allocation table, with the reasoning for Governing Body or local board decision-making set out below. Note that the high-level wording is consistent with conventions in the existing allocation table.

Table One – Proposed additions to the allocation table for urban regeneration

Proposed Governing Body decision-making

Proposed local board decision-making

· Auckland-wide urban regeneration programme outcomes and objectives

· Urban regeneration in city centre and waterfront

· Overall funding plan for priority locations

· Allocation of budget for priority location plans including sequencing of urban regeneration projects within annual budget envelopes

· Identification of priority locations for urban regeneration programme

· Implementation of priority location plans, within parameters set by the Governing Body

· Local urban regeneration projects that are not part of the Auckland-wide urban regeneration programme, for example streetscape improvements or local service property optimisation projects

Proposed allocation to Governing Body: decision-making over urban regeneration programmes

23. Decision-making responsibility for regional urban regeneration activities is proposed to be allocated to the Governing Body as follows:

· Auckland-wide urban regeneration programme outcomes and objectives – the overall programme has region-wide outcomes, such as commercial and housing development. Therefore, the Section 17 principles of taking a consistent and coordinated approach across Auckland and enabling alignment with other decisions that sit with the Governing Body, are considered to be met.

· Urban regeneration in the city centre and waterfront – these programmes are recommended to sit with the Governing Body because the scale, influence and impact of these programmes extend beyond just the Waitematā Local Board area. The success of the city centre is important for Aucklanders, New Zealanders and visitors as a regional destination.

· Overall funding plan for priority locations – the Governing Body will allocate overall funding for the lifetime of programmes, often over 10-20 years or more.

· Allocation of budget for priority location plans including sequencing of urban regeneration projects within annual budget envelopes - the nature of revenue and funding available for urban regeneration and the manner in which programmes progress, is based on elements such as market forces, and regulatory processes. This means that budgets cannot easily be apportioned to local boards and need to sit with the Governing Body, at least initially.

· Identification of priority locations for urban regeneration programme – decision-making over identification of priority locations for the overall programme is proposed to sit with the Governing Body as new locations and programmes will form part of the Auckland-wide network.

Proposed allocation to local boards: decision-making over urban regeneration programmes

24. The following activities are proposed to be allocated to local boards:

· Implementation of priority location plans, within parameters set by the Governing Body – this will include an annual work programme specifying projects, sites and/or activities in the local board area.

· Local urban regeneration projects that are not part of the Auckland-wide urban regeneration programme, for example streetscape improvements or local service property optimisation projects – these may be projects that a local board has identified as a local priority in its local board plan and has allocated local funding to.

Further work to be done to review urban regeneration decision-making activity

25. In alignment with council’s direction to empower local boards to carry out their local leadership role, staff consider that it may be possible to allocate further responsibilities to local boards. However, further work is required to test this assumption.

26. Staff propose that the current work being overseen by the Joint Governance Working Party also consider ways to give local boards a meaningful role in shaping the case for any new urban regeneration or development priority areas.

Practical application of decision-making for urban regeneration in 2025/2026

27. Table Two outlines how the allocation of urban regeneration responsibilities would work in practice. The table also includes a column outlining the work and decisions that staff would undertake under delegation.

Table Two – Proposed urban regeneration programme decision-making in practice

Governing Body (or Committee)

Local Boards

Staff via Chief Executive general delegation (from GB and local boards)

· Approves Auckland Plan, land use and infrastructure policy

· Approves urban regeneration investment through the LTP/Annual Plan, including:

o Urban regeneration budget

o Revenue target from asset recycling (property sales)

o City Centre Targeted Rate programme

· Approves new priority locations or regional urban regeneration programmes

· Approves parameters for investment in priority locations including strategic outcomes, high-level costs, benefits, and delivery timeframes.

· Decision-maker for city centre and waterfront programmes

· Approves acquisition of property

· Approves disposal of non-service property

· Consulted prior to LTP, annual plan, new priority locations and for city centre and regional programmes

· Endorses high-level programme business case for priority locations, including masterplan

· NEW Approves annual work programme specifying projects, sites and/or activities in the local board area

· NEW Approves annual placemaking and activation plans and budget for its area

· NEW Approves urban regeneration project plans within the parameters set out within approved programme business cases (i.e. scope, cost, location, benefits delivered)

· Provides advice to Governing Body and local boards to inform their respective decisions in relation to urban regeneration

· Implements approved urban regeneration programme business cases and projects in accordance with delegations

· Executes property transactions, including preparing go-to-market strategies for development sites (within parameters set by local boards)

· Provides regular delivery performance reporting to Governing Body and local boards

· Works closely with local boards, both formally and informally, from urban regeneration plans, to design of public realm projects to property optimisation, regular workshops, meetings and site visits

Allocation of decision-making responsibilities for property and asset management

28. Auckland Council will become responsible for Eke Panuku functions including the management of commercial properties, property transactions (sales and acquisitions) and management of significant assets like the city centre marinas.

29. Table Three sets out the statutory decision-making responsibilities of the Governing Body, which may be delegated to local boards. This is outlined in the first section of the Decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and local boards Policy.

Table Three – Property and marina management statutory decision-making

Governing Body statutory decision-making	Local board decision-making that is delegated from the Governing Body
· Regulatory decisions and statutory responsibilities e.g. disposals	· Service optimisation decisions over local service property

30. Table Four sets out non-regulatory decisions, which can be allocated to local boards, reflected in the allocation table.

Table Four – Property and marina management non-regulatory decision-making (new text in the ‘facilities and asset management section)

Governing Body decision-making (statutory and non-regulatory activities)

Local board decision-making (non-regulatory and delegated decisions)

· Commercial property and marina management

· Management of the non-service property infrastructure as identified in the Infrastructure Strategy

· Acquisition of new local community facilities (including local libraries, local sport and recreation facilities, local parks and reserves), and their specific location, design, build and fit out within budget parameters agreed with the Governing Body

Governing Body decision-making over property and asset management

31. The Governing Body has an overarching statutory responsibility for managing the network of facilities and overall financial oversight of the council.

32. Commercial property and marina management are allocated to the Governing Body because these properties are not delivering local council services and are an important financial contributor to council budgets. This is also the case with management of non-service property in line with the Infrastructure Strategy.

Local board decision-making over property and asset management

33. Local boards oversee the delivery of community services (such as libraries and community services), in ‘local service properties’. The Governing Body has delegated some decision-making to local boards enabling them to oversee the disposal of local service properties and reinvest this to achieve other community outcomes. This is called service property optimisation, for example by merging two council services into one building and selling the other property. Local boards also have decision-making over the acquisition of new local community facilities including their specific location, design, build and fit out within budget parameters agreed with the Governing Body.

The Group Property Framework is intended to provide principles, guidance and recommendations which will assist in improving decision-making on council’s property portfolio

34. The group property framework is intended to provide an overarching guide to the management of property across the council group, based on robust principles and agreed definitions. The scope of the group property review was agreed by the Revenue and Expenditure Committee in September 2024 (link to scope).

35. Some local boards have previously expressed concerns around a lack of information and advice on local service and non-service properties, including how property classifications are changed. The draft framework is expected to include recommendations that may address these concerns, for example:

· clarifying whether properties are service, non-service, local and non-local to ensure that local boards are given clear advice and decision-making over optimisation opportunities

· recommending a matrix team be established consisting of key property staff across council to present the full options to local boards for property optimisation options in their area.

Allocation of decision-making for economic development activities

36. Economic development activities currently delivered by TAU are being transferred to Auckland Council. There are no substantive changes proposed for the decision-making responsibility for these activities, as reflected in Table Five.

37. While the allocation of decision-making is not proposed to change, council will need to make additional decisions on economic development initiatives, for example in areas such as the Auckland Innovation Network and the Te Puna creative precinct. This change is intended to increase democratic accountability.

Table Five – Economic development decision-making (no new allocations, some minor changes proposed)

Governing Body decision-making

Local board decision-making

· Regional economic development strategy and Business Improvement District (BID) Policy

· Auckland-wide and city centre economic development programmes and initiatives

· Business improvement district (BID) programmes including establishment of new BIDs within parameters set by the BID Policy and recommending BID targeted rates to the Governing Body

· Local economic development plans, projects and initiatives within parameters set by regional strategies, policies and plans

Business improvement district (BID) programmes

38. In relation to the BID Programmes, the BID Policy outlines key decision-making responsibilities that sit with local boards and expressly recognises that within Auckland Council, local boards are the primary relationship lead with BID operating business associations. Other responsibilities that sit with local boards in relation to BIDs include:

· approval of the establishment of a new BID programme and boundary area

· approval of any changes or amendments to an existing BID programme boundary area

· annually recommending BID programme targeted rate grant amounts to the Governing Body

· recommending to the Governing Body proposed changes to a BID targeted rate mechanism.

39. Local boards may provide additional support to BID-operating business associations and BID programme delivery through their local board annual work programmes and budgets. In business districts or town centres that are not part of (or not big enough to form) a BID programme, some local boards actively partner with local businesses to develop or deliver initiatives that promote local economic development.

Local economic development plans and initiatives

40. In 2024, the reference to local economic development plans, projects and initiatives in the allocation table was removed from the allocation table after TAU funding for local economic development support ceased. The proposal to reinstate this in the allocation acknowledges that budget and resources support an activity rather than define its existence as a council function.

41. Local boards have in the past expressed interest in receiving greater support for developing and implementing local economic development initiatives in their areas. While there is currently no additional resource for local economic development activities, it is anticipated that local boards will continue to seek staff advice on these activities, and this will need to be addressed. Note that some local boards have funded economic brokers to deliver local economic development outcomes.

Clarifications around economic development in the allocation table

42. Staff also propose the following minor edits to the allocation table to bring it up to date with current policies, which are shown in Attachment A:

· removing reference to BID strategic direction in the allocation to local boards. The removal of this acknowledges that the business association is a membership based incorporated society in structure and it is the members of that society who set the strategic direction of the association and its activities. Council can advocate for a common strategic direction between the local BID programme and local board but is not the decision maker of the BIDs strategic direction.

· removing reference to Auckland Economic Development Action Plan 2021-2024 and investment framework from the Governing Body’s allocation because this action plan is out of date.

· removing reference to regional business events, and branding and marketing for the city centre, metropolitan centres and spatial priority areas as set out in the Future Development Strategy from the allocation to Governing Body because these examples aren‘t reflective of current and planned activity delivered by the economic development function.

Other amendments to the allocation table

43. As shown in Attachment A, other changes to the allocation table are designed to enhance clarity. These include formatting changes that separate activities that have been, to date, clustered together in the allocation table e.g. separation of planning and development activities from economic development activities, creation of a facilities and asset management category/activity, incorporating the existing allocation of asset renewals and upgrade responsibilities (currently at the end of the table) into the facilities and asset management section.

44. The changes also include new explanatory notes for new activities e.g. clarification of the purpose of the urban regeneration programme.

Tauākī whakaaweawe āhuarangi

Climate impact statement

45. No climate impacts have been identified as a result of the changes proposed in this report.

Ngā whakaaweawe me ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera

Council group impacts and views

46. The transfer of urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities to Auckland Council will have a range of impacts on the Auckland Council Group. These include direct political direction to staff, improved integration of activities and outcomes and efficiency gains.

47. While there are no new resources or budgets proposed as a result of the transfer of these activities, it is likely that demand for advice and support may increase with direct political decision-making.

48. The Governing Body will make a decision on the proposed allocation of decision-making responsibility for the transferred Eke Panuku and TAU activities on 29 May 2025, and these will be reflected in the allocation table as part of Annual Plan 2025/2026.

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

Local impacts and local board views

49. Existing urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities are coming in house from 1 July. The major change local boards will see, is where staff come to them seeking approval of urban regeneration activities, rather than support, endorsement, or for information.

50. As noted elsewhere in this report, when existing urban regeneration programmes are completed, new programmes and activities will be considered. It is expected that local boards will have a greater role in decisions on those.

51. Greater clarity around property management decision-making will be provided in the Group Property Framework.

52. Local economic development remains under local board decision-making responsibility. Until additional resource and/or budget is provided advice on new local economic development activity will not be possible, unless local boards fund this themselves.

53. Changes to decision-making may result in increased local board member workloads, which will be assessed as activities are integrated into council.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

54. There are no specific Māori impacts identified with the proposals outlined in this report. Engagement with Māori in relation to urban regeneration, property management and economic development is expected to continue in line with current practices.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea

Financial implications

55. No direct financial implications are anticipated from the reallocation of decisions to the Governing Body or local boards. Staff advice to support decision-making will continue, even if the decision-maker changes (for example some decisions made by the Eke Panuku Board will now be made by local boards).

56. There will be financial implications if new urban regeneration or economic development programmes or projects are started. Local boards wishing to undertake new programmes or projects will need to fund them.

57. The financial implications of integration of urban regeneration, property management and economic development functions into council (for example the dis-establishment of Eke Panuku as an entity) are being addressed by other workstreams under in CCO Reform programme.

Ngā raru tūpono me ngā whakamaurutanga

Risks and mitigations

58. The proposals in this report are intended to ensure a seamless transfer of urban regeneration, property management and economic development activities into council. Any issues that arise are not anticipated to be significant and will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

59. With activities coming in house, political scrutiny and oversight may increase and create the need to change direction. This is considered to be more likely with new programmes than with current programmes but will need to be monitored and managed. This risk is balanced against the benefits of improved democratic accountability.

60. As outlined in this report, a number of decisions will need to be made as existing urban development programmes advance to a point where resources are freed up to develop new programmes. As part of this it is anticipated that a review of current decision-making will be undertaken to ensure particularly local boards have the right degree of decision-making over local programmes and associated budgets. Staff consider there is time to manage this change and in terms of the allocation of decision-making, any further change can be reflected in Annual Plan 2026/2027.

61. Some local boards may advocate for additional or new urban regeneration and/or economic development programmes in their areas. This may be reflected in local board plans which new local boards will develop post-Election 2025. A process to manage that will need to be established. Some local boards may also wish to fund such programmes to support commencement and resource needs will need to be carefully considered to respond to this.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

62. The Governing Body will make decisions on the allocation of decision-making responsibility on 29 May 2025. Local board feedback and resolutions will be reflected in the staff report. Any changes to the allocation table will be included in the Annual Plan 2025/2026, which is due to be adopted by the Governing Body on 26 June 2025.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Proposed changes to the allocation table of decision-making responsibilities of Auckland Council’s Governing Body and local boards	191
b ⇩	List of current Eke Panuku projects in the local board area	209

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

John Nash - Programme Manager

Shirley Coutts - Principal Advisor - Governance Strategy

Authorisers

Lou-Ann Ballantyne - General Manager Governance and Engagement

Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager

[1] The Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws – Agreed Principles and Processes 2019

[2] The Local Board Involvement in Regional Policy, Plans and Bylaws – Agreed Principles and Processes 2019.

[3] Committee supporting Te Urupā o Waikumete (at Waikumete Cemetery) in partnership with council.

[4] D17 Historic Heritage Overlay; H7 Open Space Zones; H24 Special Purpose – Cemetery Zone, K Designations.

[5] For example, the works that impact historic memorials or places in Sch 14.1 Schedule of Historic Heritage or with designations.

[6] Committee has an advisory role for Te Urupā o Waikumete in partnership with council.

[7] The current population estimate is based on the most recent population estimates from StatsNZ. The post-covid period has been one of particularly high volatility with growth exceeding expectations. Future forecasts are based on the current ‘most likely’ Auckland growth scenario, AGSv1.1, These figures are the central scenario noting that the low and high are +/- 300,000 either side.

Chairperson	Tauanu’u Nick Bakulich
Deputy Chairperson	Togiatolu Walter Togiamua
Members	Harry Fatu Toleafoa
	Joe Glassie-Rasmussen
	Makalita Kolo
	Christine O'Brien
	Papaliitele Lafulafu Peo, JP

Author	Jacqueline Robinson - Democracy Advisor
Authoriser	Victoria Villaraza - Local Area Manager